Dr Craig Dent

Australia has made important strides in guardianship and supported decision-making (SDM), particularly with Victoria’s 2020 reforms. Yet reform is uneven, and practice often lags behind law. Looking internationally offers valuable lessons about what works and what pitfalls to avoid.

Several jurisdictions have pioneered approaches to supported decision-making that Australia can study:

• Ireland: Introduced legal recognition of SDM in 2015, emphasising individual choice and support networks.
• Scotland: Promotes a functional assessment of capacity, ensuring support is provided before substitution.
• Sweden and Norway: Integrate social services with legal safeguards, ensuring support is practical, continuous, and rights-based.
• Germany and Austria: Emphasise multi-layered support teams, combining legal guidance, social work, and personal advocates.

Common features in these progressive systems include:

• Legal recognition of SDM as distinct from guardianship.
• Early, proactive support rather than reactive substitution.
• Emphasis on cultural and organisational alignment alongside legal reform.

Lessons for Australia

1. Law alone is not enough: International experience shows that statutes must be accompanied by resourcing, training, and cultural change.
2. Support networks matter: Effective SDM relies on trusted supporters, communication aids, and relationships — not just legal instruments.
3. Flexibility is key: Functional capacity assessments and adaptive approaches allow support to respond to changing circumstances.
4. Monitoring and evaluation: Countries that monitor outcomes systematically ensure SDM remains empowering and prevents unnecessary substitution.

Australia’s reforms have created a framework for SDM, but gaps remain in implementation, culture, and resourcing. Learning from international practice can accelerate meaningful change.

It’s important not to simply copy overseas models. Cultural, legal, and institutional differences matter. Successful reform requires tailoring international best practice to Australia’s context, integrating local systems, governance structures, and community values.

Understanding global trends highlights that supported decision-making is possible at scale. It reinforces that autonomy, dignity, and legal capacity can coexist with protection when systems are designed with the person at the centre.

For Australia, the challenge is clear: move from legal reform to cultural and systemic adoption, learning from jurisdictions that have successfully implemented SDM.