They highlighted the difference between “supported decision-making”, where a person is assisted and supported in making his or her own decisions, and “substituted decision-making”, where others make choices on the person’s behalf, even when those choices are very well-intended. Making choices on a person’s behalf is still common, such as under guardianships or mental health laws that permit forced treatment.
Even so, the panel recognized that discerning what an individual wants is sometimes not possible, and in such cases, priority should be given to the “best interpretation of their will and preference,” not what’s regarded as being in their “best interest.”
The committee went on to stress the important role that accessibility plays in “supported decision-making”, saying that in order for people to exercise their equal rights and freedoms, they have to have accessible transportation, information and communication, physical environment, and services. They outlined the following responsibilities for increasing accessibility for nations that have ratified the treaty: