Judges, advocates and attorneys in Ohio cannot seem to agree on how to fix a broken system meant to protect the elderly and disabled from abuse and exploitation.
![]()
The subject of a yearlong Dispatch investigation, the rules for adult guardianships in Ohio are largely left up to individual county probate courts to decide. The Dispatch series, “Unguarded,” revealed that a lack of oversight has allowed some attorneys and family members entrusted to care for the state’s most vulnerable residents to take their dignity, money and freedom.
Despite an outcry from lawmakers and advocates to create changes, the Ohio Supreme Court received conflicting opinions on a draft set of rules that would strengthen the requirements for guardians. In general, judges and attorneys who serve as guardians argued against the rules, while advocates and those who work with volunteer guardians called for quick adoption of the rules and wanted them to be even stronger.
Such differing opinions contributed to delays in drafting the rules, leaving Ohio as one of the few states without a uniform system for overseeing guardianship.
The draft rules would, for the first time, require guardians in Ohio to:
• Meet personally with their wards at least twice a year.
• Undergo a criminal-background check (but not a financial check).
• File an annual report on the health and care of the ward. (Some Ohio counties require a report only every two years.)
• Avoid conflicts of interest and not serve as a direct-care provider for the ward unless authorized by the court.
• Undergo a minimum of six hours of training before serving as a guardian for the first time and attend three hours of training per year thereafter.
Full Editorial and Source:
Reactions Mixed on Proposed Rules for Guardians
See Also:
Columbus Dispatch "Unguarded" Series Page With Links to All Reports
Thousands of Ohio’s most vulnerable residents are trapped in a system created to protect them but instead allows unscrupulous guardians to rob them of freedom, dignity and their money. Even judges who oversee the system acknowledge that it is broken and allowing harm to innocent people. Anyone could end up in this system that currently controls the lives of 65,000 Ohioans. And almost anyone can become a guardian — even a felon.
![]()
Despite an outcry from lawmakers and advocates to create changes, the Ohio Supreme Court received conflicting opinions on a draft set of rules that would strengthen the requirements for guardians. In general, judges and attorneys who serve as guardians argued against the rules, while advocates and those who work with volunteer guardians called for quick adoption of the rules and wanted them to be even stronger.
Such differing opinions contributed to delays in drafting the rules, leaving Ohio as one of the few states without a uniform system for overseeing guardianship.
The draft rules would, for the first time, require guardians in Ohio to:
• Meet personally with their wards at least twice a year.
• Undergo a criminal-background check (but not a financial check).
• File an annual report on the health and care of the ward. (Some Ohio counties require a report only every two years.)
• Avoid conflicts of interest and not serve as a direct-care provider for the ward unless authorized by the court.
• Undergo a minimum of six hours of training before serving as a guardian for the first time and attend three hours of training per year thereafter.
Full Editorial and Source:
Reactions Mixed on Proposed Rules for Guardians
See Also:
Columbus Dispatch "Unguarded" Series Page With Links to All Reports
Thousands of Ohio’s most vulnerable residents are trapped in a system created to protect them but instead allows unscrupulous guardians to rob them of freedom, dignity and their money. Even judges who oversee the system acknowledge that it is broken and allowing harm to innocent people. Anyone could end up in this system that currently controls the lives of 65,000 Ohioans. And almost anyone can become a guardian — even a felon.