Paternalism to empowerment: all in the eye of the beholder?

This article reports findings from the first set of qualitative data from a study aimed to further understand practices of decision support for people with cognitive disabilities and assess the impact of training supporters in an evidence-based practice framework. It poses questions about whether, using the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) as the benchmark, it is possible to identify purchase points for assessing the degree of shift from paternalism towards empowerment of the supported person. The study findings suggest that this is a highly difficult, nuanced and subjective task offering little on which to hang objectivity. Instead, we suggest CRPD realisation of the will, preferences and rights of the person supported may better be realised through training of supporters designed to enable greater participation by persons supported and greater reflection and deliberation on wise and effective ways of providing such support by supporters. Points of interest The meaning of terms like empowerment, paternalism and capacity building are very difficult to define with any precision Whether support actually helps someone with a cognitive disability to achieve their will or preferences is hard to assess There are no easy ways of ensuring that support for decision-making stays on the path set out in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities An alternative measure of meaningful participation in decision-making may be a better guide for assessing training of supporters

Automated summary

This article reports findings from a study aimed to understand decision support practices for people with cognitive disabilities and assess the impact of training supporters. The study suggests that assessing the shift from paternalism to empowerment is difficult and subjective, and training supporters to enable greater participation and reflection may better realize the will and rights of the supported person.