Powers and Duties of Representatives and Support Persons for Adults with Disabilities: A Comparative Analysis Within the FL-EUR Countries

Abstract

This article presents a comparative analysis of how European jurisdictions operationalise Article 12 of the CRPD in regulating decision-making for adults with disabilities. Centred on question 25 of the Family Law in Europe (FL-EUR) questionnaire, it examines five dimensions across participating jurisdictions: (1) nature and scope of powers conferred on representatives and support persons; (2) decision-making models; (3) decision-making criteria; (4) duties owed to the adult, third parties, and supervisory authorities; and (5) the right to remuneration. The study draws on structured national reports and acknowledges key methodological limitations, including interpretative variation among rapporteurs, the need for abstraction for comparison, information gaps that do not necessarily indicate the absence of regulation, and the narrow focus on a single questionnaire question. The findings are therefore provisional and will be refined through continued dialogue within the Family Law in Europe (FL-EUR) network. Most jurisdictions endorse a tailor-made approach to protective measures, typically defined on a case-by-case basis by a court or authority, yet many retain broad mandates to ensure practical effectiveness. Despite the normative pressure of Article 12 and General Comment No. 1, substituted decision-making has not been entirely abolished. Representation, approval requirements or joint/co-decision models remain common. Decision-making criteria frequently rely on the ‘best interests’ standard, though several countries prioritise will and preferences and require their best interpretation when these cannot be directly verified. Across duties, legal frameworks often impose obligations to inform, consult, involve, maintain contact, and report, while a few recognise restorative duties to rebuild capacity and promote independence. Remuneration regimes differ widely, from no compensation to context-sensitive payments funded by the adult, the state or, exceptionally, third parties. Overall, European reforms demonstrate a steady movement towards supported decision-making models while deliberately retaining protective elements to balance autonomy and protection under Article 12 of the CRPD.