Legislative Analysis
Phone: (517) 373-8080
GUARDIANS AND CONSERVATORS
http://www.house.mi.gov/hfa
House Bills 4847 and 4848 as introduced Analysis available at
Sponsor: Rep. Graham Filler http://www.legislature.mi.gov
House Bill 4849 as introduced
Sponsor: Rep. Kyra Harris Bolden
House Bill 4850 as introduced
Sponsor: Rep. Rodney Wakeman
Committee: Judiciary
Complete to 6-21-21
SUMMARY:
The bills would amend the Estates and Protected Individuals Code (EPIC) to revise provisions
in Article V (Protection of an Individual Under Disability and His or Her Property) regarding
guardianships and conservatorships in Michigan. The bills would do all of the following:
House Bill 4847 would amend Part 1 (General Provisions), Part 3 (Guardians of Incapacitated
Individuals), and Part 4 (Protection of Property of an Individual Under Disability or of a Minor)
of Article V, concerning professional guardians and conservators, legally incapacitated
individuals or protected individuals, and priority of appointment.
House Bill 4848 would amend Parts 3 and 4 to establish duties of a guardian ad litem (GAL)
or special guardian ad litem appointed in a guardianship or conservatorship proceeding, what
must be included in a written report to the court by a GAL or special GAL, what must be
included in a conservator’s account, and responsibilities of a guardian.
House Bill 4849 would amend Parts 3 and 4 to do the following:
• Allow a court, under certain circumstances, to set a trial date in a guardianship
proceeding at the initial hearing.
• Revise the information to be provided in a report by a physician or mental health
professional who conducted a physical or mental health evaluation of an allegedly
incapacitated individual.
• Prescribe the conditions under which a court could dismiss or stay a guardianship
proceeding.
• Remove and replace provisions regarding appointment of an emergency guardian.
• Declare that a conservator has the duty to take steps to ensure an adult subject of a
conservatorship attends any hearing concerning the conservatorship if the individual
wishes to attend.
House Bill 4850 would amend Parts 3 and 4 concerning the appointment of a temporary and
successive guardian and removal of a conservator.
The bills are tie-barred to each other, which means that none of them could take effect unless
all of them were enacted.
House Fiscal Agency Page 1 of 13
 HOUSE BILL 4847
Professional guardians and conservators
Currently under the act, a court cannot appoint a professional guardian or conservator unless
the professional guardian or conservator files a bond in an amount and with the conditions as
determined by the court. For a professional conservator, the sureties and liabilities of the bond
are subject to sections 54101 and 54112 of the act.
The bill would add that a professional guardian or conservator must also either be a financial
institution or meet any of the following conditions before the person may be appointed as a
professional guardian or conservator:
• The person has obtained certification as set forth by administrative order of the
Supreme Court.
• The person will serve as professional guardian or conservator, or both, for no more
than two wards or protected individuals.
• For an individual, he or she is licensed and in good standing with the State Bar of
Michigan and will serve as guardian or conservator, or both, for no more than three
wards or protected individuals.
Additionally, the act now requires a professional guardian to establish and maintain a schedule
of visitation so that an individual associated with the guardian who is responsible for the ward’s
care visits the ward within three months after the professional guardian’s appointment and
at least once within three months after each previous visit.
The bill would eliminate this provision and instead require that the professional guardian visit
the ward at least once a month after each previous visit. A guardian that has obtained
certification as set forth by administrative order of the Supreme Court could not delegate
required visitation to another person unless the other person has obtained the same certification.
The bill would add that a professional guardian or conservator may use support staff and other
professionals, under the guardian’s or conservator’s active and direct supervision, to perform
office functions and client services. Support staff and professionals could be used to gather and
provide necessary information to the guardian or conservator regarding a ward or protected
individual and to make recommendations to the guardian or conservator based on their
knowledge and expertise. However, the guardian or conservator could not delegate decision-
making authority to support staff, professionals, or other persons regarding execution of
contracts or informed consent decisions, including medical, mental health, placement, or care
planning decisions.
Legally incapacitated individuals or protected individuals
The bill would add a new section to prohibit a court from appointing an individual as a guardian
of a legally incapacitated individual or conservator of a protected individual who is not a minor,
or both, under Article V unless the individual meets one of the following conditions:
• The individual has obtained certification as set forth by administrative order of the
Supreme Court.
1
MCL 700.5410 pertains to bonds: http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-700-5410
2
MCL 700.5411 pertains to terms and requirements of bonds: http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-700-5411
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4847 to 4850 as introduced Page 2 of 13
 • The individual will serve as guardian or conservator, or both, for no more than two
legally incapacitated individuals or protected individuals and receives no compensation
for providing those services.
• The individual is licensed and in good standing with the State Bar of Michigan and will
serve as guardian or conservator, or both, for no more than three legally incapacitated
individuals or protected individuals.
• The individual is related to the legally incapacitated individual or protected individual
by blood, adoption, or marriage, including step- or half-relations.
The above appointment would not apply to a professional guardian or conservator.
Priority of appointment of guardians
Currently under the act, the ward or a person interested in the ward’s welfare can petition for
an order removing the guardian, appointing a successor guardian, modifying the guardianship’s
terms, or terminating the guardianship. The bill would add that a petition for an order
appointing a successor guardian is subject to the priority of appointment, as further described
below.
First, currently under the act, the court may appoint a competent person as guardian of a legally
incapacitated individual, but cannot appoint as a guardian an agency, public or private, that
financially benefits from directly providing housing, medical, mental health, or social services
to the individual. The bill would remove “directly” from this provision and add that an agency
could also not benefit from providing caregiving to the individual.
Next, the court is currently required to appoint a person as a guardian to an individual in a
specific order of priority. However, the bill would add that the person must be suitable, based
on a determination of specific findings of the court, including at least all of the following
factors:
• The preference of the individual subject to the guardianship, including who should
serve and not serve as guardian.
• The person’s availability to the individual.
• The person’s history and relationship with the individual.
• The person’s criminal history that is relevant to the care, custody, and control of the
individual.
• The person’s personal history that will facilitate fulfillment of duties, including
employment, training, skills, and stability.
• The person’s ability to fulfill duties regardless of interpersonal disputes between
interested persons or others with an interest in the welfare of the individual.
(Interpersonal disputes could not be the sole basis for finding certain persons with
priority as unsuitable.)
• The person’s ability to meet the requirements of section 5410 (pertaining to bonds).
Additionally, when deciding between two certain persons with equal priority, the court would
have to weigh the above factors with specific findings on the record. The court could appoint
two persons to serve as coguardians and to act jointly, unless the order of appointment and
letters of guardianship state otherwise. However, a coguardian could delegate authority to the
other coguardian.
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4847 to 4850 as introduced Page 3 of 13
 Priority of appointment of conservators
The act also now prescribes an order of priority when appointing a conservator of a protected
individual’s estate. The bill would add that the person would have to be suitable, based on a
determination of specific findings of the court, including at least all of the following factors:
• The preference of the individual subject to the conservatorship, including who should
serve and not serve as conservator.
• The person’s availability to the individual.
• The person’s history and relationship with the individual.
• The person’s criminal history that is relevant to the role of a conservator.
• The person’s personal history that will facilitate fulfillment of duties, including
employment, training, skills, and stability.
• The person’s ability to fulfill duties regardless of interpersonal disputes between
interested parties or others with an interest in the welfare of the individual.
(Interpersonal disputes could not be the sole basis for finding certain persons with
priority as unsuitable.)
• The person’s ability to meet the requirements of section 5410 (pertaining to bonds).
The act now requires the court to select the person best qualified to serve if persons have equal
priority. The bill would require the court to weigh the above factors in deciding between two
persons with equal priority, stating specific findings on the record. Also, under the bill, the
court could appoint up to two persons to serve as coconservators. Unless the order of
appointment and letters of conservatorship stated otherwise, coconservators would have to act
jointly.
MCL 700.5104 et seq.
HOUSE BILL 4848
Generally speaking, under Michigan law, any person may petition a court to appoint a guardian
or a conservator for an individual who, because of mental status or disability, may no longer
have the capacity to make legal decisions for himself or herself. As part of the process, the
court may appoint a guardian ad litem (GAL) to collect information to aid the court in deciding
whether or not to appoint a guardian or conservator and, if so, who should fill those positions.
House Bill 4848 would revise the duties of a GAL appointed by a court in a guardianship
proceeding for an individual alleged to be incapacitated (who no longer has the ability to
provide self-care) or a proceeding to appoint a conservator for a protected individual (who can
no longer manage his or her property or business affairs). If the incapacitated or protected
individual does not have an attorney, a GAL is appointed by the court to represent him or her.
Among many things, a GAL must personally visit the individual and explain the petition for
guardianship or for a conservator, the incapacitated or protected individual’s rights, and what
may happen at the hearing on the petition for a guardian or conservator to be appointed.
The bill would remove the current list of duties for a GAL for an incapacitated individual and
replace it with by a more comprehensive list for a GAL. The bill also would propose a list of
duties for a GAL for a person alleged to need protection or a protected individual in a
conservatorship proceeding that would be similar to the list of duties proposed for a GAL in a
guardianship proceeding.
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4847 to 4850 as introduced Page 4 of 13
 GAL duties
GAL duties regarding gathering of information would include all of the following:
• Impartially gather information as provided by law.
• Seek information from the incapacitated individual, communicating in a manner the
individual can best understand and noting in the required report if there is a barrier to
communication or if communication is not possible.
• Interview the individual in person, at his or her location, and out of the presence of any
interested persons.
• Advise the individual that the GAL does not represent him or her as an attorney and
that no attorney-client relationship has been created.
• Identify whether the individual wishes to be present at the hearing and identify the
reasons if he or she does not.
• Identify any barrier to attend the hearing at the court location or to fully participate in
the hearing, including the need for assistive technology, transportation, or other
support. The GAL would also have to identify whether the individual has identified a
plan for how he or she will attend.
• Identify whether the individual plans to retain legal counsel or wants appointed
counsel. If the individual does not have a plan or does not request appointed legal
counsel, the GAL would have to make a recommendation as to whether legal counsel
should be appointed.
• Identify whether court-ordered mediation could be used to resolve a disagreement or
dispute related to the petition.
Other general GAL duties would include the following:
• Explain the nature, purpose, and legal effects of a guardian’s or conservator’s
appointment.
• Explain who filed the petition and who, if anyone, has been nominated as guardian or
conservator.
• Explain the hearing procedure and the individual’s rights, including the right to do the
following:
o Contest the petition in whole or in part.
o Request limits on the guardian’s or conservator’s powers.
o Be present at the hearing.
o Request a reasonable accommodation to allow participation as fully as possible,
including with assistive technology or other support.
o Be represented by legal counsel of his or her choice or, if he or she cannot secure
legal counsel, the right to have legal counsel appointed by the court.
o Request an independent medical evaluation.
• Explain that a guardian or conservator may take certain actions on his or her behalf and
inform the individual that a conservator could have any of the powers described in
section 54073 and a guardian could have any of the following powers, and—if
meaningful communication is possible—discern whether the individual objects to the
guardian or conservator having any of those powers:
o Executing a do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order.
o Executing a physician orders for scope of treatment (POST) form.
o Consenting to any medical treatment.
3
http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-700-5407
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4847 to 4850 as introduced Page 5 of 13
 o Consenting to placement decisions, including a move to a nursing facility or adult
foster care home.
o Choosing whether he or she can marry or divorce.
o Handling financial and property matters, including the sale or disposal of
personal property and maintenance of real property. The GAL would have to
inquire as to items of special or sentimental value the individual would not want
sold or disposed of, such as family photos, collections, personal correspondence,
or pets, and as to the location of those items.
• Identify whether the