@Patty Lee
Hello, even though I know a bit about limited guardianship in the state where I live, as I am a limited guardian for my wife to assist with a few certain important issues she cannot handle on her own, I do not know enough about your son's specific desires, abilities to do such items you mentioned on his own, and whether other heirs/relatives could contest some of the powers you are looking for.
In my case, I first took into account my wife's desires that she desperately wanted I as her guardian to protect her from entities that triggered her severely, and to get her important needs met that she could not get without with my guardianship role and assistance there. So, her lawyer filed a petition to get I as her guardian in a limited role, though my wife would have preferred a full guardianship there. Her lawyer chose the least restrictive method first, which I agreed with.
In most cases though, it seems the individual often contests a guardianship or conservatorship, or they may be neutral to the idea or not understand the ramifications of such. So, I was just curious what your son's opinions were with a limited conservatorship, and does he know the specific powers you are asking for? If so, are there any points he agrees or disagrees with? Or is he against it all, or does he not know these things yet? What were your discussions with him like, if any?
Without a limited guardianship for my wife she may not have been alive because of a deterioration in her condition and inability to get certain needs met that required a legal guardian to assist with her essential legal, government, medical and financial needs, and as she could no longer handle any responsibility and duties involving those matters--all which involves details, cooperation, patience, comprehension, compliance with, and following rules, regulations, structure and/or recommendations, inabilities for her.
For her situation, getting a limited legal guardian was the least restrictive way of her getting her outside needs met as we tried everything else for numerous years but she could not handle those responsibilities without causing termination of her benefits and severe worsening of her health, and as others in power refused to let I assist with those needed matters unless I had guardianship powers granted there. As her limited guardian, the marriage has become stronger, her mental health more stable, and as I feel her needs are met more. She has not been admitted as an in-patient since the guardianship was awarded.
The full truth is though that my wife would have qualified for a full guardianship based on her ADHD, neurodevelopmental condition and entire history of being unable to make informed decisions that resulted in subsequent involvements with law enforcement and in-patient hospitalizations, which only made things worse and not better. Her uninformed decisions--based on impulses, severe anxiety, fear, suspicion, lack of comprehension, impatience, disorganized thoughts, poor judgments, lack of planning ability, etc., were resulting in her important needs being not met, or sabotaged by her own doings or not doings.
Thus, without her admissions she could not handle those things anymore on her own, and without her strong desire I be the guardian, I could have been more hesitant in accepting that role there, and the result would be her benefits being discontinued (inability to sign forms, cooperate), additional in-patient hospitalizations, and/or others in power like government, financial and medical entities who know her tolerances, desires, abilities and needs less taking advantage of her. She felt I knew her best, would put her needs first, and had the most capabilities there. She trusted only I, and so for all those reasons I agreed to assist her.
So, in your case, from an outsider perspective who knows very little, it is hard to determine what your son's abilities, limitations and needs are. There are many with Autism who can handle most of those listed decisions and duties on their own, while others that could need assistance or legal intervention there. Although several of the powers you listed seem restricted, I try not to judge there as if you have medical reports backing up his needs there, or if his lifetime of experiences, totality of his condition, cognitive functioning shows he could have severe difficulties there, a lawyer would often steer you in the right direction.
I just know that I will know before each of our children reach eighteen what they can handle and not, with regards to such items you mentioned. I would always try to lead them to be independent there much prior to that age, but if I saw a pattern of actions, inactions and behaviors that showed they could not handle such, or if I felt they were not able to make informed decisions for important matters and do the required duties there, and would take much dangerous extra risks in life because of that, of course the caring thing to do would be to assist in certain ways. I would first though make sure I considered and we tried ALL lesser restrictive measures first. The court may or may not want you to detail those first.
So, the key is determining if the adult child can make informed decisions, and that is likely what the court will want the focus to be, and they will determine your ability to assist there for that adult child's best interests. Can the adult child see the good, neutral and bad outcomes for each of those choices, or are his decisions made without thought, or seeing only one side to things? It's not relevant if he is inexperienced for things or if he could make poor decisions, as we all at times were new to making such decisions and had made poor decisions before, regardless of condition, as that happens. We learn from our mistakes. But, if our bad decisions are because of some severe condition where we consistently cannot make informed decisions, then yes, some sort of assistance and protection is needed, if all reasonable and less restrictive things have been tried first and failed.
My concern is if persons assume those needing a guardian must be assisting just some old, senile, learning disabled or bed ridden person. That stereotype is a myth, or it should be, as it is an archaic view of what incapacitation entails. Unfortunately, many judges have no ability to look deeper, and they may discount medical findings or have slanted views to assume things that are not true. Many incapacitated persons can have abilities, but their incapacitation can be more hidden or show up at certain times or ways, that only caregivers can see in all those environments, and over longer term. It's important for their caregivers to not only try to make sure their child is independent as possible, but if all else fails, to let medical persons know of their concerns regarding independent living skills, decision making and such, to document such, in case they have ideas as well, and in case such reports are needed later.
We cannot judge a persons' need for a guardian by age, race, gender, disability, and so on. Some with conditions can handle their essential needs alone, and many just need assistance without legal intervention. Of course those are preferred. Other rarer cases though, may need legal assistance there, or else that incapacitated person will be taken advantage of or not be allowed accommodation for their needs to be met. It depends on the individual situation, how informed those individuals' decisions are, and what the specific needs are.
In the case with the former judge who first ruled in my wife's case, almost a year and a half ago, truth is she seemed initially biased against my wife, by her rude statements in court she made to her, and first seemed against her need for a guardian, as my wife looked young, friendly, and was of a perceived race that should be able. Well, how many young persons like that die or have worsened condition, without that legal intervention, because of those unfair judgments and if then their condition worsens trying to do those things required by them alone, or because of the very uniformed decisions they make for serious matters? At least that prior judge finally saw the truth there, and the important need, and saw I as a guardian was able, and wanted her best interests only, as the guardianship was strongly needed for her.
And I see the very recent guardianship review has resulted in continuance of the guardianship too, as of a few days ago when that decision was made as well, which shows those upholding the law looks at these important factors mentioned. Hopefully the right decision will be made in your case too, with the judge looking at all sides and evidence, instead of having predetermined views, and giving the facts and evidence issues the proper weight.
