|
|
||||||||
The Gerontologist, Vol 33, Issue 1 81-87, Copyright © 1993 by The Gerontological Society of America
ARTICLES |
PM Keith and RR Wacker
Department of Sociology, Iowa State University, Ames 50011.
We analyzed 1,160 court records to determine whether implementation of recommended procedural safeguards and guardianship practices was associated with outcomes of hearings for older persons. The presence of the proposed ward at the hearing was not related to decisions about guardianship. Proposed wards who retained their own counsel were more likely to receive limited guardianships or have the petition denied. Wards with undefined court-appointed counsel more often received full guardianships than those without representation.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
J. W. Burruss, M. E. Kunik, V. Molinari, C. A. Orengo, and P. Rezabek Guardianship Applications for Elderly Patients: Why Do They Fail? Psychiatr Serv, April 1, 2000; 51(4): 522 - 524. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
|
S. L. Reynolds Protected or Neglected: An Examination of Negative Versus Compassionate Ageism in Public Conservatorship Research on Aging, March 1, 1997; 19(1): 3 - 25. [Abstract] |
||||
|
D. K. Kjervik, I. Miller, K. Jezek, and M. G. Weisensee Decisions about guardianship for older persons: Incompetency criteria American Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Other Dementias, July 1, 1994; 9(4): 13 - 22. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
---|
All GSA journals | Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences | Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences |