O.C.G.A. § 29-5-20 (2019)
Rights of adult ward; impact on right to vote or testamentary capacity
(a) In every conservatorship the ward has the right to:
(1) A qualified conservator who acts in the best interest of the ward;
(2) A conservator who is reasonably accessible to the ward;
(3) Have the ward’s property utilized as necessary to provide adequately for the ward’s support, care, education, health, and welfare;
(4) Communicate freely and privately with persons other than the conservator, except as otherwise ordered by a court of competent jurisdiction;
(5) Individually, or through the ward’s representative or legal counsel, bring an action relating to the conservatorship, including the right to file a petition alleging that the ward is being unjustly denied a right or privilege granted by Chapter 4 of this title and this chapter and the right to bring an action to modify or terminate the conservatorship pursuant to the provisions of Code Sections 29-5-71 and 29-5-72;
(6) The least restrictive form of conservatorship, taking into consideration the ward’s functional limitations, personal needs, and preferences; and
(7) Be restored to capacity at the earliest possible time.
(b) The appointment of a conservator is not a determination regarding the right of the ward to vote.
(c) The appointment of a conservator is not a determination that the ward lacks testamentary capacity.
History
(Code 1981, § 29-5-20, enacted by Ga. L. 2004, p. 161, § 1.)
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former O.C.G.A. § 29-5-7 are included in the annotations for this Code section. Ward’s right to make will. - The appointment of a guardian for adults who
are incapacitated does not destroy the ward’s right or ability to make a will. Pope v. Fields, 273 Ga. 6, 536 S.E.2d 740 (2000) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 29-5-7). The probate court’s jurisdiction to approve the settlement of a malpractice claim and to protect the best interests
of the incapacitated ward conferred upon that court the authority to require that the ward’s attorneys pay into the registry of court such settlement funds as the attorneys disbursed to themselves, and to hold them in contempt for their refusal to do so. Gnann v. Woodall, 270 Ga. 516, 511
S.E.2d 188 (1999) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 29-5-7). Cited in Levenson v. Oliver, 202 Ga. App. 157, 413 S.E.2d 501 (1991); Heichelbech v. Evans, 798 F. Supp. 708 (M.D. Ga. 1992).