[GA—AT VOTE—FOR] Repeal: “Preventing Abuses in Conservatorship”

---

General Assembly Resolution #739 “Preventing Abuses in Conservatorship” (Category: Regulation; Area of Effect: Legal Reform) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the positive intentions behind GA 739, in order to minimize the potential suffering that can occur through the misuses of conservatorships, and to preserve the ability for individuals with significant mental health issues to receive proper care, and

Questioning the World Assembly's role in implementing restrictions on specific legal services that largely have to do with the internal affairs of an individual nation, that does not pose an immediate and widespread humanitarian crisis, and

Disputing the success of the target at actually minimizing harm and suffering faced by conservatees, which face issues such as:

1. The scope limiting the resolution to cover conservatorships approved by three mental health specialists, as in Section 2, meaning that conservatorships imposed with the approval of fewer than three mental health specialists (including circumstances where no specialists approve) are not restricted by the resolution at all, and
2. Relying on member nations to set specific regulations, which fails to bring proper protective regulations to any nations which actively wishes to circumvent the principles behind the resolution, instead opting to only institute further protections in nations which already have the goodwill of conservatees in mind, and
3. No separate recognition process is needed for conservatorships given in non-members to be granted recognition by members, meaning that abusive conservators can receive a conservatorship in a non-member and have that be approved by a member with no further clarification needed, and

Concerned at the negative side effects this resolution creates, such as:

1. Clause 9(a) fully prohibits any former ambassador or staffer of the World Assembly to be placed under conservatorship, even if absolutely needed due to mental health issues, with no exceptions given under the scope of the target, and
2. Clause 6(b)'s requirement that one must aim for the full preservation of a conservatee's capital by a trustee prevents the use of capital for reasonable expenses, such as food, water, specialized treatment, and other expensive utilities which neither the state nor the conservator ought to pay for, and

Believing the best course of action is to repeal this resolution and let conservatorships be a matter handled by individual members, therefore

Repeals GA 739, 'Preventing Abuses in Conservatorship'.

Click to expand...

Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations, NPA personnel, and those on NPA deployments will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote. If you are on an NPA deployment without being formally registered as an NPA member, name your deployed nation in your vote.

---

Voting Instructions:

• Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
• Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
• Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
• Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.

Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!

---

Overview
The original resolution, GA #739 "Preventing Abuses in Conservatorship," was enacted to safeguard individuals with significant mental health issues from potential abuses under conservatorship. It mandated specific regulations for conservatorships, including the requirement to get approved by at least three mental health specialists, imposing a fiduciary duty on conservators, and ensuring regular reviews of conservatorships.

Recommendation
While the intentions of GA #739 were indeed, commendable, this repeal proposal highlights several substantial flaws. The resolution’s requirement for three mental health specialists' approval excludes cases where fewer specialists are involved, allowing some conservatorships to bypass the safeguards completely. The lack of a separate recognition process for conservatorships from non-member states creates a loophole that could enable potential abusive practices. In addition to that, provisions such as Clause 9(a) that prohibit any former WA staff or ambassadors from being placed under conservatorship, regardless of the situation, create undue barriers that could prevent adequate care.

Furthermore, Clause 6(b) requires trustees to aim for full capital preservation, which can prevent the use of funds for essential services like food, treatment, or other critical expenses. Besides, the fact that the resolution relies heavily on member nations to set their own regulations, particularly in nations that do not prioritize the welfare of conservatees, weakens its overall effectiveness.

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote For the GA proposal at vote, "Repeal: Preventing Abuses in Conservatorship."

This IFV Recommendation was written by Brisdon in collaboration with the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs.

The editing error in the resolution is the opening of clause 2.

"This resolution governs only conservatorships imposed on a conservatee due to the individual being deemed by at least three MHSs to be"

Should have been

"Conservatorships (can) only (be) imposed on a conservatee due to the individual being deemed by at least three MHSs to be"

If this passes, I'd fix the error and some other typos and roll it out again.

For

For

Simone:

The editing error in the resolution is the opening of clause 2.

"This resolution governs only conservatorships imposed on a conservatee due to the individual being deemed by at least three MHSs to be"

Should have been

"Conservatorships (can) only (be) imposed on a conservatee due to the individual being deemed by at least three MHSs to be"

If this passes, I'd fix the error and some other typos and roll it out again.

Click to expand...

What's your vote? You didn't specify.

for

For

Against

Sigh. Okay.

For

SkyTheAquariusOP:

What's your vote? You didn't specify.

Click to expand...

Present. And I am campaigning in my personal capacity against quorum.

Against

For.

For

For

For

For

Against

Repeal "Preventing Abuses in Conservatorship" was passed 10,484 votes to 1,434.