2023-10-31 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on the Judiciary
2023-10-31 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on the Judiciary
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Alright.
Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Michael Day. I am the, house chair of the Joint Committee on the Judiciary. Pleased to be chairing today's hearing, and to be joined by my colleague and friend, chair Jamie Eldridge from the senate. Today,572 we're going to be covering the topics, relating to probate and family law. Now let me578 start by introducing my colleagues from the House who have joined us. I've got, representative, vice chair Christine Barber to my left in person. Joining585 us virtually, representative Carey, representative Hendricks, Representative Fluger Oakley and representative Markey, welcome. Senator, any opening words?
SPEAKER2 - Thank you, chair Dey. Thank you everybody for coming. I don't think there's any senate members of the committee here virtually, but thanks for coming, and looking forward to the testimony. Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Terrific. Thanks. Before we607 begin, I'll run through some, traditional609 ground rules for the committee611 itself with respect to testimony, to ensure that everyone who has registered has a chance to speak, testimony will be limited to 3 minutes per individual. Individuals are welcome to speak once per hearing but may address more than 1 bill During that testimony, if they wish to do so, written testimony may be, submitted and will be taken any time for consideration until the committee acts on the bill. That may be sent either by email to research director Michael Musto@michael
dotmust0@mahouse.gov
or written to the judiciary committee at 24 Beacon Street, Room 136, Boston, Mass 02133. We have more than 55 individuals signed up to speak today, So I ask that you take this into consideration as well as the fact that it's Halloween and many of the families here wanna get home to watch your little ones trick or treat. When it's your turn, we're gonna be respectful and considerate so that every person has an opportunity to testify, and share their stories. Please note that we'll be calling you based on bill number and your name as written on the675 registration form whether you signed up virtually677 or in person. If you signed up679 for multiple bills, you'll be called based on the bill681 that you first listed on the registration form. With that, we will welcome testimony, and I call forward, representative Donny Berthiaume to testify about h 13/98, an act relative to health care proxies. Welcome, representative. Yesterday.695
SPEAKER3 - Rep Barber697 and those online, happy Halloween. You can see, I wore my, that old ball guy costume today. So
SPEAKER1 - Quite the costume. We appreciate it very much.
REP BERTHIAUME - HB 1398 - Like all Bills, like708 you guys know, mostly start, this issue was brought to my attention a few months ago, no, maybe little more than a few months ago, an issue was different hospitals in the Worcester area, some of the staff had contacted me health care proxies. So from what I understand and I'm there's a bunch of people here on the phone to testify, and believe me, they're the experts on this, I'm just here to give a synopsis and then intro to them. So when when nobody has anyone, family, you get a court appointed, guardian. This guardian, they get paid for this. So I'm hearing and you'll hear today that sometimes these guardians aren't as responsive as they need to be. That sometimes it could take three, four, 10 days.
One hospital in the city recently had to go to court because they never heard from the guardian, so they had to try to get their own guardianship to make decisions for a person in their care. This is the issue, and this771 is what we're trying to do. So this language is from Colorado, they775 have775 this there. So we took Colorado's language sent to the house counsel, and they modified it for our state and our statute, and this is what's in front of you today. This is kind of a conversation starter, and I'm open to any I mean, you're an attorney, Chairman Day, I am not, so, I am open to any suggestions you guys have on this, but, I will defer to the people testifying today, and, if you have any further questions, please just let me know. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thanks, rep. Thanks for bringing this issue to us as well. Any questions from members of the panel?
SPEAKER3 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Segun Verghe. Thanks very much. I will move now to senator Pavel Paolo, who's here to testify virtually on h 1744, An act relative to uniform partition of heirs property.
Thank you.
SPEAKER4 - Hello.
SEN PAYANO - HB 1744 - Thank you, Chair Day, thank you, Chair Eldridge, for allowing me to testify in support of H 1744, an act relative to834 uniform partition of heirs' property. In 2020, Mass Inc. identified838 that between 2007 and 2017, Massachusetts saw sharp declines in black and Latino residents purchasing homes in Boston, but saw an increase amongst, black and Latino buyers in gateway cities. As Senator of the 1st Essex representing Lawrence, Methuen, and Haybrook, I want to ensure that we continue to invest858 in our cities, and ensure that our860 residents are aware of their estate rights, and future generations can continue to choose to live in our cities if they choose.
However, black and Latino households are less likely to obtain a will or trust which in turn these are assets and families inheritance at risk. In a report by Boston College Center for Retirement Research, it was found that Latinos and blacks are much less likely885 than whites to have received any kind of inheritance. This could be due to many reasons, like the inability to pay for legal892 representation or understanding how894 to create an estate plan. Currently, under state law, heirs898 property is defined as a real estate900 owned by the legal heirs of the previous owners who do not have a valid will or a state plan that has specified ownership. Multiple heirs can also take ownership of the property as tenants in common.
This Bill would support the family's ability to preserve the wealth for their heirs who want to retain their property while allowing other heirs to sell their share of property at a fair price. Unlike current law where any tenant in common can sell their interest in the property without the consent of the co tenants. This has made it easier for non family members to acquire an interest in the property and allowed real estate speculators to acquire heir properties in a force partition by sale. This puts the property at high risk to most likely sell below its fair market value, depleting a family's wealth in the process. This system disproportionately impacts low and middle income families that cannot afford costly estate plans and961 for whom inherited real estate represents a significant asset.
This legislation would help families preserve the wealth met by mandating that court orders and independent appraisal to determine the is fair market value. If the court then decides to order a partition by sale, the property must be offered on the open market at a price no lower than the court determined value for a reasonable period of time. The legislation will also preserve the right of a co tenant to sell their interest in inherited real estate while also ensuring that the other co tenants will have due process in preventing a partition by sale. Through this legislation, low and middle income families will be better able to retain ownership of their inherited real estate and get more value from it in the event of a sale. The Bill had1012 already passed 21 states, the District of Columbia, and the1016 US Virgin Islands, and I hope for a successful passing here in our Commonwealth. Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the committee. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, senator. Appreciate the testimony. Any questions? From members, seeing none virtually as well. Senator, thanks very much.
1034 We'll1034 now move to h 1648, an act relative to the Massachusetts Uniform Trust Decanting Act, And welcome Andrew Rothstein from the Boston Bar Association, who's here to testify virtually.
Terry Watson?
SPEAKER5 - Unable to.
SPEAKER1 - We got you.
SPEAKER5 - Can you see and hear me?
SPEAKER1 - We've got you. Go right ahead.
SPEAKER5 - Thank you.
ANDY ROTHSTEIN - GOULSTON & STORRS PC - HB 1648 - SB 977 - My name is Andrew Rothstein, I'm an attorney at Goulston and Storrs in Boston, I specialize in trust and estate planning. I'm a resident of Dover, Massachusetts. I'd like to thank Chair Eldridge, Chair Day, and members of the committee for permitting me to speak today about this Bill. I'm talking on behalf of the Boston Bar Association, as a former co chair of its trust and estate section and in support of the Massachusetts Uniform Trust Decanting Act, which is House Bill 1648 and Senate Bill 977. Trust decanting is a valuable estate planning tool. In a decanting, the trustee of an existing trust transfers all or a portion of the trust assets to a new trust for one or more of the same beneficiaries. This is similar to pouring or decanting a bottle of wine from one container into another. Decanting affects nearly every trustee in the Commonwealth, including Massachusetts banks, trust companies and individual trustees. It also affects ordinary residents of Massachusetts of all levels of income and wealth who have created trusts as part of their estate plans to provide for their spouses, children, and other family members.
Decanting is especially useful to protect vulnerable beneficiaries such as individuals with special needs and with mental health and substance abuse issues. In my practice, I frequently assist Massachusetts trustees with decanting Trusts in order to provide for beneficiaries in a more suitable way and in order to ensure the achievement of the trust purposes in light of changed circumstances. In essence, decanting is a tool that allows a trustee1182 to address changed circumstances. Currently, our1186 general laws do not expressly authorize decanting, we sometimes look to Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court cases that may allow decanting in some circumstances. However, having a statute would make decanting available to all trustees.
The Act would protect and strengthen trust business in Massachusetts. Currently, banks and trust companies are limited, as I mentioned, and their ability to decant this statute would make them less limited. From a technical perspective, I served on an ad hoc committee of trust and estates lawyers who carefully vetted the Uniform Trust Decanting Act, revised it to conform to Massachusetts statutes and initially recommended its enactment. Since then, not only has the Boston Bar Association, but also the Massachusetts Bar Association and the Massachusetts Bankers Association endorsed this legislation. In conclusion, we think that this would be a much needed improvement to our existing trust statutes, and we hope that it is enacted. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, counselor. We know this is a fairly complex area, of the law within this, in this field, so we appreciate your testimony and willingness to work with the committee as we move forward here. Any questions? Seeing none, thank you. I'd also like to recognize, that we've been joined by Scanlon and representative Mendez, virtually as well as members of the committee. Welcome them. And I wanna make note that, representative, Finn and representative Garberly were to appear on h 1485, an act relative to authorizing supported decision making agreements for certain adults with disabilities. They have ceded their time so that the public, can use that time for their testimonies. We appreciate both of them. They've reached out to us directly, as well. We'll move to h 1539 filed by representative Gregoire, an act relative to determining capacity and invoking the health care proxy. And welcome, Nicole DePace, Darlene Sawicki, and Laura Black from the Mass Coalition of Nurse Practitioners. Welcome.
SPEAKER6 - Hi.
NICOLE DEPACE - MASS COALITION OF NURSE PRACTITIONERS - HB 1539 - My name is Nicole DePace, and I am here to ask for your support in H 1539, which will give nurse practitioners legal authority to determine capacity for patients who are under their care. I have practiced as a nurse practitioner in hospice and palliative care for 13 years. My patient population includes adults who are living with serious illnesses like cancer, dementia, heart failure, advanced lung diseases, and other progressive illnesses. Having capacity for medical decision making provides the basis for participating in informed consent, and an assessment of a patient's capacity occurs in every patient encounter that involves decisions about medical treatment, whether this encounter is with a physician or with a nurse practitioner.
Evaluating whether a patient has capacity for medical decision making is an inherent aspect of all clinical practice. This is a holistic and ongoing process through which a provider evaluates the patient's ability to do the following things; understand their diagnosis and their treatment options, appreciate how information applies to their situation, is able to reason and apply the information in a way that integrates the facts with their values and wishes and is able to communicate their choices. We know that patients who are seriously ill are at high risk of losing capacity due to the progression of their illnesses and it is documented in the literature that anywhere from 30% to 70% of patients will lose capacity at end of life.
Despite the well documented benefits of hospice care for patients and their caregivers, time spent in hospice is usually short. The National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization reports that 25% of hospice patients receive this care for less than five days, and 50% receive this care for less than 18 days. Sadly, it is not uncommon for hospice care to be delayed to a lack of determination of capacity for medical decision making. This is because electing the hospice benefit is a process of informed consent, and patients who have lost capacity1449 or whose capacity is in doubt cannot give that consent. It is only through a determination that they lack capacity and through formal invocation of their health care proxy that their surrogate decision maker can do this on their behalf.
Under current Massachusetts law, only attending physicians can determine capacity and invoke the health care proxy. In my practice, I can think of numerous instances where hospice care has been delayed for days and, unfortunately, even weeks while patients have waited to be seen by an attending physician who is willing, comfortable, or available to make the capacity determination. Many of these delays cause undue distress for patients and their caregivers. Delaying access to hospice care for this reason is unnecessary because these patients either were or could have been evaluated for capacity by myself or nurse practitioners in my practice. I appreciate your time today on behalf of my patients and their families. I look forward to this gap in law and practice being resolved.
DARLENE SAWICKI - MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL - HB 1539 - Good afternoon. My name is Darlene Sawicki, I'm a nurse practitioner at Mass General Hospital, and I wear two hats there; I'm also the director of advanced practice providers where I oversee the clinical practice for roughly 850 nurse practitioners. I'm also an ALS, NP and have been so since 2012. So, clinically, I share a panel of patients with physicians that are dedicated and outstanding, but they're very busy. The vast majority of work on symptom management and coping is dealt to the nurse practitioners in the clinic including myself. Because of this setup, we are the first ones to recognize if there's a cognitive change in our patients. We do the vast majority of histories and physicals for our patients for their surgeries.
During this history and physical, this is where we have the discussion of health care proxy, what it is, why it's important, and when is it invoked. When we do this, this is sometimes where we pick up1573 if there's a cognitive change. We know that the literature currently shows that in ALS, it's also called Lou Gehrig's disease, greater than 50% of our patients may suffer from cognitive changes. Of that 50%, 25% will be diagnosed with FTD, frontal temporal dementia. My NP colleagues and I are the first ones that are paged when our patients come to the emergency room or to the floors to be asked advice on how the patient should be cared for. This is no reflection of the physicians that are there, this is truly because we are, privy to their baseline, and we know the subtle changes in cognitive status of our patients.
Recently, a physician colleague of mine saw a patient who was experiencing behavioral changes and was refusing to engage with the clinicians and the interventions, the caregiver was at her wit's end. The physician, while she's a brilliant ALS physician, did not have an established baseline with this patient, reached out to me and asked if this was a cognitive change, if I thought it was, and if I could declare health care proxy invoke that. I said, I could not, and, yes, this was a change. Her soonest available appointment was months away, so our only recourse was to send the patient and the caregiver to our emergency department where they would have to wait hours, if not days for physicians to evaluate them that don't know them than to wait days again to be admitted, to have physicians that do not know them, evaluate them only a page me, go to the floor, and then relay the patient's baseline if this was a cognitive change.
So I cannot think of anything more unnecessary and cruel than to our caregivers and bring their loved ones into the emergency department. It is an awful exercise that we put them through, and Bill, H 1539 will allow nurse practitioners who are properly trained and educated to care for patients optimally and decrease the unnecessary burden placed on patients, caregivers, physicians, and the health care system. Thank you.
LAURA BLACK - MASSACHUSETTS COALITION OF NURSE PRACTITIONERS - HB 1539 - Good afternoon. My name is Laura Black, and I am a board certified nurse practitioner and the current President of the Massachusetts Coalition of Nurse Practitioners. I'd like to start by thanking our state's leaders for including language, granting full practice authority for nurse practitioners and an act promoting a resilient health care system that puts patients first, which was signed into law in January 2021, thank you for that. Under full practice authority, eligible nurse practitioners functioning within the scope of practice can now manage patients independent of a physician. Building on the previous legal recognition of nurse practitioners as primary care providers, it also means that patients who designate a nurse practitioner as their primary care provider may have an attending nurse practitioner as opposed to an attending physician involved in their care.
Over the past two years, our organization has been working with nurse practitioners and health care leaders across the state to advance the goals of full practice authority so that NPs in Massachusetts are practicing to the full extent of their education, training, and licensure. Although we have made significant progress, existing barriers to nurse practitioner practice still remains. As highlighted by the powerful testimony of my colleagues, one of these barriers is related to determining capacity regarding medical decision making and invoking the health care proxy, which is currently limited in statute to an attending physician.
From a practical standpoint, this means that independent nurse practitioners have their hands tied when the patients they care for are no longer able to make medical decisions for themselves and require invocation of their health care proxy. The assessment skills that are required to determine capacity are already recognized in other Massachusetts statutes, including those that authorize nurse practitioners to sign involuntary Section 12 commitment orders and complete medical orders for life sustaining treatment or most forms. There are countless examples of patient scenarios that underscore why this creates problems for patients, families, and providers.
When nurse practitioners cannot determine capacity and invoke the health care proxy for patients under their care, decisions regarding medical treatment are delayed, which can lead to unwanted and costly medical treatments, unwanted or extended hospitalizations, and negative patient outcomes. Patient's wishes cannot be honored, and families and caregivers are subject to undue emotional stress. Our physician colleagues who are overstretched and may not be readily available are forced to see and make capacity determinations on patients they may not know. By passing H 1539 and removing this unnecessary statutory barrier, Massachusetts can better position itself to respond to the many health care challenges facing the state and better serve its patients. I urge the committee to favorably release H 1539, and thank you so much for the consideration. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you all for your testimony and for your work. I know we've dumped1882 a lot on nurse practitioners, so we appreciate you coming forward in this. Any questions1886 from the members of the committee? Thank you. Seeing none, thank you all.
I will now move on to testimony on h 1485, filed by representative Finn, chairman Finn, an act relative to authorize and supported decision making agreements for certain adults with disabilities. We will welcome first a, a panel of Jonathan Gardner from the Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council and Nancy Gardner from the Arc of Massachusetts. Welcome.
SPEAKER9 - Thank you.
SPEAKER10 - I thought I had those on. It's okay.
I would,
JONATHAN GARNER - MASSACHUSETTS DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES COUNCIL - HB 1485 - I would like to thank you all for the opportunity to testify in support of an act relative to authorizing support decision making agreements for certain adults with disabilities, H 1485. My name is Jonathan Garner, I live in East Bridgewater, Massachusetts. I am a 20 year old, decision maker, cancer survivor who happens to have autism. I have many different types of support and supporters to help me live my best life. I use something called support decision making or SDM. SDM is an alternative to garnish with a person, me, takes a group of people they trust to help them make decisions. I'm the decision maker in my life. I've used support decision making in my fight against cancer, my mental health, and most aspects of my life today.
When I was 16, my mother and I were told by the school that I need full guardianship, this didn't feel right for us. My mom had learned about SDM, and we decided to try it in my life. To me, SDM is another tool and choice that I have in my toolbox. I think school shouldn't pressure families into guardianship, there are lots of other options people can use. I started by choosing my supporters, I decided on different people who would help me with different parts of my life. My first SDM plan only include my mom, dad, and brother but as I grew older, my plan had evolved, and I added many other supporters to my team in different areas of my life.
Because SDM lets me keep my rights, I can change my own plans as my needs in life change over time. I'm the one in control of my life, not a judge or a guardian. In 2021, I was diagnosed with Ewing's Sarcoma, which is a rare form of cancer. This was during the height of Covid-19. I was already using SDM in my life, so it gave me some comfort to know I would have support going through this new life journey. However, Covid-19 visitor restrictions made using SDM harder. We had to advocate with the hospital to have my supporters with me at my appointment, a hospital should be required to respect SDM as a way of accommodating people with disabilities.
It should be recognized as a way everywhere. Fighting cancer has been one of the hardest journeys of my life, I would not be the person I am today without SDM. For example, when I was six months2077 into chemotherapy and two weeks into radiation, I came home one day, and my body and mind2081 were feeling horrible and hopeless. Then, I ended up in my bedroom crying and just really wanted to give up. I told my mom, I don't care what happens to me, I just wanted to stop even if it causes it to kill me. My mom had to take time to process all this herself, but when she came back into my room, she came back not as my mom, but as my support person.
She said to me, Jonathan, I don't know what the answer to this all is, but if you could put your faith in me as your support person, I'm going to try my hardest to help you figure this out. From there, I gave my mom the okay to contact the medical team, and together they all came up with a different plan for me to think about. After the meeting, I was able to talk to my supporters about the plan and get my questions answered, and then I agree to move forward with it. The plan ultimately saved my life while also taking care of my mental health at the same time, thanks to SDM. SDM truly makes me feel involved in my life. It provides me with choices about, when and how I was able to go about receiving my cancer treatments. Because of SDM, I was able to let my body and voice guide me with the help of my supporters. I did not have many choices when it came to having cancer, but at least I was able to control when and how I got through it.
Full guardianship would have been worse than death to me, I would have lost my choice if I was not able to pick my support people during my cancer treatment. I would just be a shell of myself now if I even survived. I'm the type of purpose person that needs to have full trust in the people that are in my life. If someone else picked those people for me, I will not fully be able to be the person I am today. I need to make my own choices for my own life. If a guardian had2162 forced me into treatments, I would have been severely depressed, damaged, and not the person I am today. SDM offers more options in my life, and I firmly believe2168 that SDM gives people like me a choice for freedom and a choice of who supports them. Everyone should have the right to choose the way they want to live so they can live their best lives to the fullest. Thank you.
NANCY GARDNER - THE ARC OF MASSACHUSETTS - HB 1485 - I would like to thank you all for the opportunity to testify in support of supported decision making or SDM. My name is Nancy Gardner, I live in East Bridgewater with my husband and two amazing sons. As you just heard from Jonathan, I am not just his mom, but I am privileged to be one of his support people. When Jonathan started cancer treatment, no one at the hospital seemed to know about SDM. I had explained that I was not just a parent, I was a support person, and both my husband and I were support people.
Therefore, Jonathan needed us both with him to go for treatment. There was a lot of pushback at the beginning. Jonathan's medical team learned a lot from us, and along with their guidance, when Jonathan wanted to stop his treatment, I was able to support him by gathering and breaking down the information and choices he needed to continue the treatment and save his life. As Jonathan's mom2222 and support person, I can tell you that my greatest worry has always been what will happen when my husband and I are no longer here. SDM has created a sense of security and weight off our shoulders just knowing that Jonathan's voice will be validated by people he has chosen to support him and care for him.
His voice and choices matter, because of SDM, Jonathan has evolved to be a more self confident individual in his choices, he is self advocating to a point that I could never have had imagine, and I just want him to continue to guide us on his journey so he can live his best life. If SDM became a law, more people will be willing to try it. Families would not have to fight like we had to and explain what SDM is to so many health care providers. It will just be understood and accepted. Cancer was hard enough to deal with, families should not2267 have to fight to get the support they need2269 for their loved ones. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you both, very much for your testimony. And, Jonathan, we're very happy to see you here today. We're glad you continued the fight. Thanks for coming up and testifying for us. Any questions from members of the committee?
SPEAKER14 - I just state the mic.
SPEAKER1 - Vice chair.
SPEAKER14 - Thank you so much. I met Jonathan recently, and it's really nice to see you here today, and thank you for being such a leader on these issues. I really appreciate it. So thank you. Also like the the, shout out to Halloween with Thank
SPEAKER15 - you so much. Thank you, Rev.
SPEAKER16 - It's okay. On Christmas, I'm just gonna play the Christmas tree now.
SPEAKER17 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Thank you both very much.
Next, we'll welcome up a hybrid panel. In person, Anna Krager from the Mass Advocates for Children And virtually, Bob Fleischner from Nanotech.
Hello? Welcome.
SPEAKER18 - Okay. So I won't see. I just I didn't know if I had to wait to for Bob to appear, but he'll just come next. Okay. Good. But he's here in spirit. Thank you all so much. I guess in spirit is the right way to begin since it's Halloween.
ANNA KRIEGER - MASSACHUSETTS ADVOCATES FOR CHILDREN - HB 1485 - My name is Anna Krieger, and I'm the executive director at Massachusetts Advocates for Children and just so happy to be here in support of this legislation on supported decision making. We've all heard the adage, when you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail, and it really applies today when we're talking about guardianship as, you know, Jonathan and Nancy really just illustrated through their testimony. Supported decision making is a widely embraced alternative to guardianship, and it's a model where people with disabilities and older adults choose their own group of trusted supporters who can help them with making and communicating decisions.
That looks different for every person, and you'll hear from many people today who'll describe their personal experiences with it. To be clear, it's not an option that we're promoting for every person, we just want to add another tool in the toolbox so that we don't just have a hammer, families need more than one option, and right now, that is how it's been presented. So as we are working with a really broad coalition of lawyers, people with disabilities, elder advocates, guardianship attorneys, providers, and we have put a lot of thought into crafting a2400 Bill that gets that balance right in terms of providing people the options they need and also creating the appropriate2406 safeguards. So we urge you to join the 18 other states that have already passed very similar legislation as well as the District of Columbia.
I'll just briefly give an overview of the reasons we needed this Bill and the things that the law would do if it was passed. It would make supported decision making more widely available, that's a huge piece of it. And it would do that by requiring that schools when they're having transition meetings, not just talk about guardianship, but also educate families about alternatives to guardianship like supported decision making. It would require the courts when they're considering guardianship, consider whether supported decision making is an appropriate, less restrictive alternative, which is already what's required under the law, it just makes that explicit.
It also defines supported decision making, so it makes it clear in law what a supporter can and can't do, sort of the scope of the role. It establishes the requirements for what should be in a supported decision making agreement, including including putting right in that agreement how to report if there's ever a concern about misuse of the model by a supporter, which agencies to report to. It also includes and this piece is maybe not the most exciting and glamorous, but really important, a liability shield for third parties who are relying in good faith on the agreement, and we know because we do lots of training of hospitals and other places that until we have a protection like that, it's just not going to be embraced on a large scale because it's just for the reasons that Nancy and Jonathan pointed out, it's harder for it to take hold. There are a number of safeguards that will be discussed by my colleagues, you'll hear more about that, but one important piece is that it allows if there's a concern about abuse or neglect for the court to consider getting rid of the agreement. With that, I'll just end and say there's many other wonderful things the Bill would do, but we really appreciate your time and attention to this important issue. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much for your testimony. Mister Fleischner.
Not present? Alright. We'll come back to miss Fleischer if he comes back on.
SPEAKER18 - I can message him to
SPEAKER1 - make sure.
SPEAKER18 - Yeah. I think he was connected. Creep, any questions or
SPEAKER1 - Questions for that? Seeing none. Thank you very much.
SPEAKER19 - Thank you
SPEAKER20 - so much.
SPEAKER1 - Next, we'll have another, hybrid panel. We'll welcome up, Mara Sullivan from the Arc of Mass And Rick Glassman, who's testifying virtually from the Disability Law Center.
SPEAKER21 - Sorry. Bob said he couldn't unmute, so hopefully we can get him back on.
MAURA SULLIVAN - THE ARC OF MASSACHUSETTS - HB 1485 - Good afternoon, Chair Day, Chair Eldridge, and members of the joint committee. Thank you for this opportunity to add another voice of support to H 1485. I'm typically in front2598 of committees talking about the unmet needs of people with disabilities whose voices you don't get to hear but today, you will hear from the experts themselves, the voices, the people with the lived experience, and they happen to be very effective advocates. My name is Maura Sullivan, and I'm the director of government affairs and health policy for the Arc of Massachusetts. It's also awesome to co chair this 54 member coalition with Jonathan Gardner, who you just heard from and to have spent the last, actually, five years alongside them advocating and educating lawmakers and staff in the building.
The Bill continues to be a top priority for the Arc of Massachusetts, and I just have three important facts to share. Supported decision making will not replace guardianship or will it affect those who need guardianship. I'm the legal guardian, and an excellent one, I would say, for both my sons who have profound2671 autism. We recently survived that process twice, and honestly, it couldn't be any other way. But we must ensure that people have the knowledge of alternatives available in order to take a person centered approach. At the Arc's statewide transition conferences and other trainings, we hear from family caregivers and students who've only been informed by school educators that they should get guardianship.
Also, I teach at all of our medical schools, and last year when the Bill passed unanimously through the Senate, I had requests from health care professionals to provide trainings, and that was until I answered their first question, is it law yet? And when I said no, but it's currently being used, there was no longer interest in being trained. A state law will be the only way to fortify this worldwide self determination and human rights movement. So thank you for hearing today from our large coalition, I will be submitting over 40 pages of testimony for you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
And, now I'll turn it over to Rick Glassman.
SPEAKER1 - Terrific. Thank you.
SPEAKER22 - Okay.
SPEAKER17 - Okay.
SPEAKER23 - That's so2784 strange.
SPEAKER1 - Alright. So I'll go back to, Bob Fleischner then, and then we'll circle back to Rick.
Go right ahead. We got you.
SPEAKER16 - Oh, good. Thank you. I apologize for the, difficulties with this.
ROBERT FLEISCHNER - MASSACHUSETTS ASSOCIATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH - HB 1485 - I'm Bob Fleischner, I'm testifying on behalf of the Massachusetts Association for Mental Health. Although the majority of supported decision making users are people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, supported decision making is not just for them. With colleagues at the center for public representation and non tech resource associates, I helped to create the first support of this making project in the United States. Several of our participants were people with mental health diagnosis and elders with dementia. Their experiences proved that2877 SDM could and infected and worked very well for that. There are many reasons why, particularly for people with mental health diagnosis. First, supported decision making can reduce the need for course of the dimensions including guardianships.
Second, it can2891 help enhance and promote strong therapeutic alliances. Third, it can aid individuals in their recovery. And fourth, it can result in a greater capacity to consent and therefore, it reduced the need for some for substitute decision makers like guardians. All of these Reasons are explained in much greater detail in the lengthy letter MAMH has submitted to the committee. In my 50 years of legal practice, guardianship defense was a significant part of what I did. I co authored a treatise on Massachusetts guardianship published in three editions by Alexis. Guardianship, unless limited by a court, results in a nearly total loss of legal personhood.
People with guardians have little or no control over their own lives. Supported decision making is just the opposite. By providing support is to ensure that people retain agency and decision making authority. In my work, I learned that although guardianships are sometimes necessary, a significant number of people have guardians because there appear to be no other2956 alternatives. SDM provides2958 an alternative for some people. In my work, I also observed that some guardians seldom consult for whom they're responsible. You've read the stories from the wit the nurse witness, this is Erwin. SDM is just the opposite. I observed that all of guardian tried to assist people to grow and to learn to make decisions, others make little effort to do so. SDM arrangements, on the contrary, result in improved decision making skills and increased feelings of of worth and control as you heard from Jonathan.
I observed that it's almost impossible for courts to monitor guardians. The probate court's working on this, but supported decision making is just the opposite, supporters are usually people who are closest decision maker, and each supporter can check possibly of misbehavior by others. Moreover, the Bill provide the mechanism of third parties to petition the probate court when validated, supported decision making agreement if there's a suspicion of abuse and neglect. The process is at least as protect probably easier to use than the process to terminate the guardianship. SDM's not for everybody, but neither is guardianship. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony, miss Fleischinger, your assistance as well. We appreciate both very much.
SPEAKER25 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Do we have mister Glassman?
Alright. We'll circle back if we3059 can get him back online. Next, we'll welcome I I think I'm now on I'm sorry.
SPEAKER26 - Chair Day, can you hear and see me now?
SPEAKER1 - We've got your go right ahead, sir.
SPEAKER26 - Okay. Thank you so much. I'm sorry. We're having technical problems.
RICK GLASSMAN - DISABILITY LAW CENTER - HB 1485 - I'm Rick Glassman, I'm the director of advocacy at the Disability Law Center. I just wanted to say a a few things to follow-up on Bob's comments about the kinds of guardrails and protections that are available through the statute. We, at DLC what, what's known as the Protection and Advocacy System for the Commonwealth. We're designated under Federal law to investigate abuse and neglect in a broad variety of settings, including group homes, congregate settings, institutional settings, and we also work on the issue of financial exploitation.
We have a team of four people who investigate representative payees for financial exploitation for the Social Security Administration, that's all they do. So, with that background and being grounded in that work, we would not be here, if we were not convinced that there are more than adequate safeguards and guardrails available in this law to prevent financial exploitation or other kinds of harm to people with disabilities. In fact, as Bob indicated, in many respects, including reporting and access to records and the ability to terminate a relationship that is not working well for the individual, in many ways, supported decision making offers more than traditional guardianship.
So going back to Jonathan's comments about the toolbox, the point I wanted to make is that if we have too few tools in the toolbox, and we have mostly guardianship, and we don't have alternatives, we have the kinds of harms that happen from not having adequate protections and we have another3175 whole level of harm as3177 well, which happens when people don't have the right tools at their disposal, particularly people who are under guardianship that need not be. We routinely encounter people who are unable to make very basic decisions in their life because3195 they have a guardianship and in situations where it's really not necessary. So we have the benefit here of a law that has been carefully thought out and constructed, we have the benefit of about 19 other jurisdictions that are ahead of us.
We have the benefit of a pilot project that's already happened in the Commonwealth. And people with disabilities, their families and advocates are here today to say it's time to move3223 on and try to provide other alternatives for people3227 so they can live full and3229 complete lives in the community. So, we hope that you'll support this Bill, report it favorably out of committee. If we can help with any technical aspects of reviewing it, I hope you'll let us know. Thank you for the opportunity to be heard. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony, mister Glassman, and the offer to to help. We appreciate both. Any questions from the committee? Seeing none, thank you.
Go back to, virtual Wynn Gerhard.
Sorry? She's
SPEAKER26 - there. What's she got?
SPEAKER1 - Alright. We got another problem with the mute situation. We'll move to Malia Carlotta of Nonotuck.
SPEAKER17 - Hi.
WINDROW-CARLOTTO MALIA - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 1485 - Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today in support of Bill H1485 that formally recognized supported decision making in Massachusetts statute. My name is Malia Windrow-Carlotto, and I'm the mother and ex guardian of my son Corey. Corey is on the autism spectrum and as he approached the age of 18, my husband and I felt he needed more time to develop this decision making skills. This left us with a dilemma, how do we protect Corey in the meantime? We researched our actions, spoke with human service agencies, lawyers, and trusted friends.
The options were presented to us in a binary way. Guardianship or no guardianship. We reluctantly chose guardianship with the intention that one day, we would ask the court to give Corey back his rights. I thought I knew what guardianship was all about, but it turned out involved so much more. First off, it cost us thousands of dollars in legal fees. In addition, we were required to publish an ad in the local newspaper declaring that we believed our son was incompetent. We didn't think3376 our son was incompetent, he just needed3378 more time to ensure. Even after the court appointed me as his guardian and Rogers monitor, we faced an endless stream of paperwork and court appearances.
Then in 2012, Corey had an acute bout of anxiety and panic attacks, it became necessary to consider hospitalization until we could find the right medication. To this day, it causes me great pain. I believe I knew what Corey wanted when I made that decision as his guardian. Only then did I learn what he really wanted, he wanted to be asked, he wanted to make the decision. I never asked him if he wanted to go to the hospital, I just decided for him. It made me realize my son did not need a guardian, he just needed some guidance. In January of 2015, Corey joined the pilot program on supported decision making that was organized by a service provider, Namata Resource Associate, and the Center for Public Representation. Corey selected his father, his sister-in-law to be his supporters. We do our best to explain to Corey what his options are, to educate him about the pros and cons and to know that when and if he makes mistakes, it's all part of growing up.
On November 17th, 2015, Corey became the first Massachusetts resident to have the court terminate his guardianship in favor of a supported decision making agreement. Corey is now a 32 year old and has flourished since he started to use the court of decision making. He's currently living in his own apartment, has traveled the country with friends, and is now working full time. He has recently added his previous DDS chief manager to his SDM team. Supportive decision making is how Belgium becomes the adult he wishes to be. SDM should be the first step to provide the assistance of protection for our most vulnerable citizens. Please support this important legislation so Massachusetts residents can retain their rights through supported decision making. Thank you again SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
for this opportunity.
Thank you for taking the time, miss Carlotta. Any questions from the committee? Seeing none, thank you for3516 your time and sharing your story as well. Appreciate it.
SPEAKER17 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - I will turn now briefly to s 2398, an act relative to the well-being of new mothers and infants, And welcome virtually senator Joan Lovely.
SEN LOVELY - SB 2398 - HB 3939 - Thank you, Chair Day, Chair Eldridge, and members of the committee. Thank you for taking me out of order to testify on this Bill, S 2398, an act relative to the well-being of new mothers and infants. This is a companion Bill to H 3939 filed by3545 Representative O'Day, it is a refiled Bill. Let me just tell you3549 quickly what this Bill does. It defines postpartum psychosis and postpartum depression, it requires all defendants who have given birth within 12 months prior to the commission of an alleged crime to undergo a screening for perinatal psychiatric complications.
Let me first start by saying this is not about the Duxbury case, it's, currently underway right now. This is a refiled bill that both myself and Representative Day filed when we were chairs of the Postpartum Depression Commission, and we have refiled again this this session. Why did we file this Bill? We were approached by many people to file this So, but this Bill would protect dependents who were suffering from severe postpartum psychosis, psychiatric complications when they committed a crime, and that they can be treated and recovered fully.
Let me just say properly treated to recover fully. New birthing individuals who suffer from mild to severe postpartum depression, make a full recovery with for treatment. The defendant should be treated with the assistance of experts in reproductive psychiatry, allows defendants to be treated in an outpatient setting when appropriate. And, again, this is not about the Duxbury tragedy. I do have a letter that's very great detailed about this legislation that I will submit to the committee, but, anyway, I do think this is an important Bill, now it appears to maybe be a timely Bill.
The Duxbury tragedy is not the first time that something's happened like this, we would like the committee to really examine this Bill, and, there will be other experts speaking up after this Bill. Let's just drill down into it to see if we can do something for people who are suffering from severe psychiatric, psychosis related to postpartum depression within the first year of birth of an infant. I'm going to stop there and I'm happy to answer any questions, and again, thank you for taking me out3691 SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
of order.
Thank you, senator. We'll look forward to that, written submission as well. Any questions from members of the committee at this time? Seeing none, I will just correct, or for clarify. I3702 think you referenced me, representative Day. You meant representative O'Day is far more distinguished and accomplished than I am. And with that, we'll move to, leader representative Jim O'Dea, virtually.
SPEAKER27 - Thank you, mister chairman.
SPEAKER24 - Mister chairman, please stop it. Stop it with those kind words, mister chairman.
SPEAKER1 - The clock's running, mister leader.
SPEAKER24 - I hear you, brother. I cannot get on here, faithfully here, so I apologize for that. Anyway,
REP O'DAY - SB 2398 - HB 3939 - Thank you, Senator Lovely, for your eloquent eloquent words on this particular piece of legislation; House 3939, and then this is just the Senate Bill that the Senator just referred to. This is my third time actually filing3753 this particular piece of legislation. So as the Senator has spoken to, this has nothing to do with any ongoing cases presently here in the Commonwealth, but I can tell you as a former social worker for the Department of Social Services and doing literally thousands of 51A investigations, this particular piece of behavioral health questioning is a necessary piece of legislation. Certainly, there are individuals in this world, regrettably, who find joy in injuring children.
This Bill is not addressing those individuals, this Bill is addressing a mom. Actually, one in seven new parents experiencing postpartum Depression, postpartum psychosis occurs in approximately 1/10 to 2/10 of 1% of birth, which in Massachusetts is as many as 143 women. This is likely a growth miscalculation due to postpartum depression being vastly underdiagnosed as birthing people are not being screened sufficiently enough here in the Commonwealth. Maternal depression is deemed the greatest risk factor for maternal suicide and fantasize.
To preserve the integrity of our criminal justice system, we must ensure that those performing examinations of defendants in the course of criminal proceedings are experts with the termination reflects sound mental health analysis. This Bill will create a set of guidelines that will assure the defendant who gave birth within 12 months prior to the alleged crime is screened for prenatal psychiatric complications and examined by a reproductive psychiatric expert. Doing so will ensure that any person suffering a mental illness related to a perinatal psychiatric complication who was found not guilty by reason of mental illness is given a treatment plan made in consultation with an ex reproductive psychiatry.
3889 The3889 Bill will also permit someone previously convicted, and I think this is important, previously convicted a petition for a rehearing where their postpartum mental state could be considered. We specifically ask that the3904 committee favor report this Bill so that more mothers and children don't get egregiously miserved of a conditioning system may only grip the question of post post depression. Thank you, committee. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, leader O'Dea. Any questions from the members of the committee? Seeing none, thank you, and thank you to UN center Lovely for your work on that commission as well. Appreciate it.
SPEAKER24 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - I move back now to testimony on h 1485, and welcome, virtually, Wynn Gerhard?
SPEAKER28 - Excuse me. I'm sorry. This is doctor Spinelli. I was to testify on the
SPEAKER1 - Yeah. Doctor, we're we're we're taking it in order. We accept, legislators out of turn as a courtesy, so we'll come back to you shortly.
SPEAKER29 - Hello. This is Wynn Gerhardt. Can you see me or hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Go right ahead,3961 Wynn. Yep.
SPEAKER29 - Okay. Thank you.
WYNN GERHARD - MASSACHUSETTS GUARDIANSHIP POLICY INSTITUTE - HB 1485 - Good afternoon, Senator Eldridge and Representative Day, and, thank you very much for the opportunity to testify. I'm Wynn Gerhard, I'm an attorney with the Massachusetts Guardianship Policy Institute and a member of the supported decision making coalition. On behalf of the Massachusetts Guardianship Policy Institute, I'm here today to urge you to support establishing supported decision making as a right for any person who chooses to elect that option for recognizing a group of supporters to help the person make his or her own life decisions.
The institute's primary focus is on guardianship reform to address the needs of those individuals who lack decision support but have no family or loved ones and need someone in good faith to help them access health and medical care, and we're also interested in improving the system of oversight for court appointed guardians and conservators. That said,4011 our mission also includes fostering alternatives to guardianship, such as health care proxies, durable powers of attorneys, and supported decision making. Current probate court practice requires that any petitioner seeking the appointment of a guardian or conservator must disclose to the court whether that person has executed a health care proxy or adorable power of attorney.
If so, the presumption is that the appointment is unnecessary since the person has already designated another to provide necessary assistance. The institute supports the view that the court should add whether the person is executed or has the capacity to execute an SDM agreement as another alternative to any court appointed fiduciary. It is currently law that a court appointed guardian has limited authority as to the incapacitated person and is obliged to include that person in decision making as much as possible and respect his or her wishes and values. The notion of minimizing intervention and avoiding unnecessary loss of autonomy is very much expressed in the nationwide embrace of supported decision making by legislators all around the nation, including 18 states in the District of Columbia, and it's now time for Massachusetts to join those who respect the rights of everyone who may be seen as having diminished capacity.
The proposed legislation is all the protections needed as you've heard from other people testifying and including the person of fellow supporters identified in the agreement, which is a greater measure of oversight than in the case of a health care proxy or a durable power of attorney since the supporters are part of the person's life. Again, the institute urges the legislature to listen to self advocates and respect their wishes and enact the law to establish SDM in the Commonwealth. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thanks for your testimony, and, glad we're able to resolve the the microphone issues. Any questions from members of the committee? Seeing none, thank you again. Thanks. We'll move now to former senator, Barbara L'Italien from the Disability Law Center, also testifying virtually.
SPEAKER30 - Hello. Hopefully, you can hear me.
SPEAKER1 - Welcome. We've got you.
SPEAKER30 - Thank you.
BARBARA L'ITALIEN - DISABILITY LAW CENTER - HB 1485 - Thank you, both Chairs and to the Vice Chair and everyone listening. Barbara L'Italien, I'm currently the executive director of the Disability Law Center. So I'm not a lawyer, although we certainly have a large number of folks that can speak to all the ins and outs of that on your behalf if you have questions. I would just like to talk about this at a very personal level. When my son turned 18 years old, I had the conversation with our former colleague, Tom Synechandro, asking him what I should do. I had a son that was on the autism spectrum, certainly could benefit from guidance and decision making, but guardianship felt so heavy handed, so over the top, and so unnecessary for my son.
For my son, having the opportunity to weigh in on issues around his health, his finances, his housing, his employment, his social relationships is critically important and central to his sense of well-being. So the thought that that would be taken away in part or in whole just did not make sense. So we did not seek guardianship, however, we are, my husband and I, a part of my son's life every single day and try to help him, but he leads the way, and that's the way it needs to be, and so I really believe that we have a gaping hole here in Massachusetts, having an all or nothing approach to supporting and assisting folks.
When I think back to Tom, I also think of our many struggles and fights to try to ensure that everyone understood that folks with disabilities deserve the fullest life possible and that they should have the right to make choices just as we do at every step of their lives to the fullest extent possible. It speaks to people's ability to seek independence, dignity, and autonomy, and it's truly a civil rights issue. So I would hope that we would consider as the Senate did last session, passing supported decision making, following what 19 states have done most recently, Alabama. So if Alabama can raise that level, I think Massachusetts, it's high time that we meet that level. So again, I thank you so much, really appreciate the time this afternoon. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, senator, for your testimony. Questions from members of the committee? Seeing none, thank you very much. We appreciate it.
SPEAKER18 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - We'll move now to welcome, Kim Plaat From Mass Advocates Standing Strong, who's here in person.
SPEAKER31 - Hi.
KIM PLAUT - MASSACHUSETTS ADVOCATES STANDING STRONG - HB 1485 - Hi. I've actually been working on supported decision making with Mass Advocates Standing Strong, and I've been co chairing since 2017. I've actually been doing SDM with my life and doing it freely, Mass has helped me, and I've been involved with SDM since 2017. It is very important for all self advocates to have a voice, SDM will give us that ability. An example of a way that I have been using my voice with SDM is by setting my own goals, everyone needs to set their own goals. I've completed my HiSET exam and have gone on to4366 the Bridge to College program where I completed English 111, some of my dreams that I have had come true. I'm now going to Bunker Hill Community College where I do the art program and I go to Gateway Arts. These are the decisions that I have made, not anyone else for me. With the passage of this Bill, it would give people more freedom to make their own decisions and to set4401 their own goals and follow their own dreams. SDM is a tool that gives individuals the ability to take guardianship off the table.
SDM worked for me, and it will work for many others, and I have worked with Mass and many other organizations to put together SDM agreements, and these forms were created by Mass Advocates Standing Strong. This allows people to select their own support as needed. I believe that all self advocates and elders should have this opportunity in Massachusetts. Everyone uses SDM every day, even all of you sitting here today will be using SDM. It is hard to believe, but everyone uses SDM in their life. Friends, family, coworkers, we all have to talk to somebody about something. Today, you guys will sit together and decide whether or not to pass this Bill, that is SDM, talking to each other, making a decision in your lives. Please pass the supported decision making Bill so that we have that same opportunity as people with disabilities to make decisions in our lives. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, Kim, very much for your testimony. Any4498 questions from members of the committee? Seeing none, thank you very much. I'll now welcome forward Marie Hennessy, also from Mass Advocates, standing strong.
SPEAKER18 - Just a second.
MARIE HENNESSY - MASSACHUSETTS ADVOCATES STANDING STRONG - HB 1485 - Good afternoon. My name is Marie Hennessy, I am a self-advocate with a disability, and I work at Mass Advocates Standing Strong as a peer trainer and serve as co-chair with Kim with the MASS supported decision-making task force. MASS is an organization that supports and empowers self-advocates with intellectual and developmental disabilities across Massachusetts. One of the many first times and opportunities when I made a choice to advocate for myself happened during my junior year in high school. I was meeting with my guidance counselor who said I should continue taking business classes because I was not a strong candidate for college, and I should not consider college in my future. I spoke up for myself and said that my plan is to go to college as I want to work in human services field providing services to persons with disabilities. My guidance counselor then said the meeting was over, and we never met again.
Because I had a lot of support, I did not give up, I reached out to my teachers at school who encouraged me to pursue college and follow my dreams, which is what I did and one of the reasons why I'm here today. When thinking about how important the passage of this Bill is, remember, all of the people, whether it be teens, adults, who we might know or work with disabilities, who are told by caregivers every day what to do, and these individuals need to ask before making any independent choices, and do not know that they can use their voices to make even small choices, such as what to wear, what to do for fun, who to be friends with, where to work, how to get involved in their community, how to communicate with their doctors, case managers, service providers and the list goes on and on, in addition to other professionals.
Take a minute to think about this question; what would your life be like if you could not make any choices or decisions? In conclusion, I ask you to pass Bill 1485, which will provide persons with disabilities the ability to make their own life choices using supported decision making as an alternative to guardianship so that they can lead happy, productive, and successful lives of their choosing, like so many of us have done here today. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much for your testimony, miss Hennessy. Any questions from members of the committee?
Thank you very much for your patience and your testimony. Appreciate both.
We'll move now to Morgan Whitlatch from the Center for Public Representation who will be testifying virtually.
SPEAKER32 - Thank you so much.
MORGAN WHITLATCH - CENTER FOR PUBLIC REPRESENTATION - HB 1485 - Hello. My name is Morgan Whitlatch, I'm the director of supported decision-making initiatives at the Center for Public Representation. CPR is a legal advocacy center that's committed to protecting and advancing the rights of people with disabilities, and we've been an active member of the Massachusetts Advocates for Supported Decision-Making Coalition. I'm here today to express strong support for House Bill 1485 and to share with you some of the national trends around supported decision making that highlight why you should pass this legislation. As Robert Fleischner indicated in his testimony, CPR has supported pilots on supported decision making in Massachusetts since 2014 with a number of valuable partners. From our independently evaluated pilot, we know that supported decision making model works, strengthens support networks and can transform lives. To see evidence of this, you have only to hear the powerful story shared today. Through CPR's national work, we have seen formal recognition of supported decision-making grow dramatically over the last decade across the United States.
At least 18 states plus DC have passed comprehensive supported decision-making agreement laws like the one before you today, Rhode Island and New Hampshire are among these states, and we strongly urge Massachusetts to join them. The legislation before you would not only benefit Massachusetts residents, but it would also benefit probate courts in Massachusetts by reducing the financial and administrative burden of having to address guardianship petitions for people who do not need them. For example, as indicated in our 2021 news article cited in my written testimony, since Wisconsin supported decision-making law was introduced in 2017, the annual number of guardianship requests in that state decreased by 20%.
Supported decision making has been recommended or endorsed by many respected national organizations and federal agencies, these notably include the American Bar Association, which passed a resolution in 2017 urging state legislatures like you to amend their guardianship statutes to recognize supported decision making as a less restrictive option. In addition, supported decision making was specifically included as a less restrictive alternative in the Uniform Law Commission's 2017 update to Article 5 of the Uniform Probate Code, which was the basis of Massachusetts guardianship law.
Leaders in this field, including judges, attorneys, legal scholars, and policymakers from around the nation, also included some of the very reforms that House Bill 1485 would achieve and the recommendations they adopted at the 4th National Guardian Summit in May of 2021. CPR provides technical assistance on supported decision making across the country. Our experience has shown that supported decision making is a viable and beneficial decisional support and passing this legislation is going to enable many more individuals and families in Massachusetts to access4961 and enforce this important model. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, miss Whitlatch. Any questions from the committee? Seeing none, thank you very much. I'll now welcome virtually a panel, Sandy Deer from Nonotuck Incorporated4977 and Amanda Jo Benoit.
SANDY DEARE-ROBINSON - NONOTUCK INCORPORATED - HB 1485 - SB 109 - Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of Senate Bill 109, which was formally recognized supported decision making in Massachusetts statue. My name is Sandy Deare-Robinson, I live in Pittsville. I want to share my firsthand experience about how effective supported decision making can be for people with disabilities. In 2009, Amanda joined my household, and I became her friend, supporter, and caregiver. Amanda has helped me and my5012 children learn how best to respect and help people with disabilities. Our relationship blossomed so much that I asked her to be a bridesmaid at my wedding, I consider her to be the core of my family.
In 2014, Amanda was asked about supported decision making, I thought it was the best model for her to choose because it would secure her rights and choices. Amanda knows who's is in her life, she knows who she trusts, and she is capable of making decisions. She just benefits from the help of her SDM team, which provides her with more support, one on one discussions of pros and cons, and information on the big picture of a decision. When Amanda joined the Nonotuck and CPR SDM pilot, she made an awesome choice for her future. Since Amanda signed her SDM agreement, she has flourished and made progress towards big goals in her life.
She has consulted with her SDM team on some major decisions such as her banking, her relationships, her health, and best of all, living her dreams to travel. For example, during the Covid-19 pandemic, Amanda has some health scares, and she leaned on the members of her SDM team to help her understand what the doctors were saying about complicated subjects such as blood clots and cervical myelopathy. First SDM team helped her navigate whether or not to have a surgery, and with the help of people she trusted, she made her own decision to move forward with it. After the surgery, Amanda's mobility's changed, skills changed, and she had to make another difficult decision this time about employment.
Her doctor was unable to medically clear her to return to her former position, which Amanda was very disappointed about. After much discussion with our SDM team, Amanda came to understand she had more recuperate into Dell, and so she decided to receive day service with her friends until her mobility improved. The supported decision making has helped Amanda keep her voice, growth in her decision-making skills and make her own choices in life. Please move forward and pass Senate Bill 109 so more people in Massachusetts can benefit from supported decision making. Thank you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Yes. Hi.
SPEAKER23 - Hi. My name is. I'm living in with my caregiver, Sandy, and her family. I have been in an in the FDM
for 9 years. I am happy to share with you, some of my decisions, I made with supported from my SDN team. My SDN team, I have Sandy, my mom, my 2 friends, Maggie and Diane, when I need help with,
I look to Thank you for supporting. I also speak to my SCN team. My helping me decisions
with my health,
5248 Money,5248 body, and new day program5252 level and with my over the last 2 years,
and my SDN team haven't supported me With my health care, really supported supported to me. And about my health decisions and helping me understand the pros and the cons. This helping me make 8.
And Centimeters is a5305 key Because I have in Taequanda. I have
many places
with my friend, Meg, in in the end of my boys' matters, We support the SDN bill and helping us All
SPEAKER26 - our beliefs.
5350 SPEAKER15350 -5350 Thank5350 you very much, Amanda Jo and Sandy,5352 for your testimony. We appreciate it. I will let, I will let,5356 chair Eldridge test that black belt in taekwondo against you, but we appreciate your testimony very much. Any questions from members of the committee? Seeing none, thank you both. We'll move now to, Jonathan Jenkins from Nanotech5373 Incorporated.
SPEAKER25 - Wait. Ready? Yep. Hi.
JONATHAN JENKINS - NONOTUCK INCORPORATED - HB 1485 - I'm Jonathan, I like Separate decision making. I had my family and my trusted friend help me my existing position and help me on my interest. I'm on my SMT. I have my mother, my brother, my sis and aunt Debbie, Shannon, Wilma, and, Maggie. Well, I need help with my diligence, I proceed look to my mother and my father for support. However, I don't speak to my other team members, my team. My SDM team helps me out, and I'm a job. I work as grills on the place. Am I SDM team help me get active hours? I like to work and make some money. And I need help, getting more hours. So, I need all my SDM team to help me with this, my friend at Rios, he came here at work. I work with my new sub folks, Arshannon. I have worked for 14 years today; I love it there.
My SDM team helps me grow in my skills, and I just need to say yes with my baking house dishes at doctor's and Dentsy's department. Goodbye. How do you feel towards this? My SDM team is very important to me. I because the 10th time the SDM pop up, I have made a decision in in my life we were asking, I have saved money and pre created my TV, and I have we done it with the babymoon. I have troubles with my friends, he made purchases. So here's California, Tennessee, and Florida, it helps you separate decision making. It's important to me be because I feel I make my own decisions. It can help from my team to reach my goals, I am big for CPR, my very best friend, Maggie, and George Martin here but other SDM have over here. It has changed my life. I'm excited to meet the newest SDM.
MAGGY WALTO - NONOTUCK INCORPORATED - HB 1485 - Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today to support the SDM Bill. My name is Maggy Walto, and I'm a care manager for Nanotech Resource Associates. I'm very passionate about supported decision making because I believe strongly people with disabilities should be given a voice, a choice in their rights. People with disabilities have the right to be included in their own decision-making process to the fullest extent. I've been a part of the SDM pilot program through Nonotuck and CPR since October of 2013. I've helped many people get set up with supported decision making as a facilitator, and I've also been a supporter on some of the teams. I've watched many of the SDM members' lives changed by introducing them to supported decision making.
For instance, we had an SDM member want his own apartment, he leaned on his SDM team for some guidance on how to go about making this happen. The parents had a one-on-one talk with him and, without judgment, pointed out the financial cost of the decision as well as the pros to independent living. In the end, the SDM member made his own choice and wanted to pursue his first apartment. A few of the SDM members and families have been approached by the state about guardianship for their loved ones, and the families responded by reporting that the supported decision making offered an alternative to guardianship, which they'd rather pursue.
One of the SDM supporters said, my sister has a processing disorder, and she just needs time to answer. She also needs support in understanding decisions, and she tends to lean on her family to help her. This doesn't mean she needs a guardian; she needs patience and time to process, and then she is quite capable of making her own decisions about her life. Currently, families have no other model but guardianship to choose from for their loved one. As a care manager, I've had the experience of having a court appointed guardian from Boston call me and not know a single thing about a person from the Berkshires they are guardian for. They were asking me about the person's likes and dislikes and if a certain day program would benefit this person.
Supported decision making would resolve this issue, and the SDM member would choose their closest support network to be a part of his or her team. The SDM model gives a supporter the flexibility of using different learning styles to help the person understand decisions. The SDM model provides a way for these individuals to make known of what they are thinking and feeling about important life decisions. It's time to pass the supported decision-making Bill in Massachusetts, it's time for people with disabilities' voices to be heard. Thank you. I just want to add, everyone that has gone on here, and supported decisions dot org, they have, many different stories about their work with supported5750 decision making, so it's very important to add. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much for your testimony and for adding that in. Appreciate, both of your testimonies. Any questions? Seeing none, we'll move on. Thank you very much, miss Walter. We'll move on to Beth Collett virtually from Mass Advocates Standing Strong.
Hold on, Zach, Beth. I think we've got you. You're on mute. See if we can adjust that and start you over.
SPEAKER17 - Yes. That
SPEAKER1 - There you go. We got you.
SPEAKER36 - Okay.
BETH KOLLETT - MASSACHUSETTS ADVOCATES STANDING STRONG - HB 1485 - Good afternoon. My name is Beth Colette, I am totally blind. I'm going5796 to waive the Perkins School for the blind in 1998 to 2004. They strongly recommended guardianship to all the residential Massachusetts students, I did not want this, I wanted to make my own decisions. I got involved with Mass Advocates Standing Strong in 2006. I have held many officer positions with the Mass Advocates Standing Strong Central region. My time with Mass Advocates Standing Strong led me to the support decision making process. I needed this in my life. It would give me freedom to make my own decisions.
I encourage people to stand up for their rights and empower themselves by using supported decision making to make their own choices and not be told what to do. So, on August 24th, 2022, was the hard work of my dedicated peer guide support team and Mass Advocates Standing Strong, I was the first Massachusetts president to have my support decision making agreement with my mother as my supporter notarized. Please make supported5880 decision making so that other self-advocates and people with disabilities are able to choose SDM as an alternative to guardianship5895 as 18 other states in the United States already have.5899 Please pass the SDM Bill, House 1485. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, Beth, for your testimony. Move to, Tamara Huntley from the Mass Developmental Disabilities Council, also virtual. Tamara Huntley.
Tomorrow looks at the camera's frozen, but we've got you, I think, by audio if you'd wish to testify.
Alright. We'll see if we can come back, to tomorrow if we can get that rectified. In the meantime, we'll welcome a panel, hybrid panel of Cody Rooney, who's here virtually, Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council, and Jennifer Bertrand, who's here in person, also from the Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council. Welcome.
SPEAKER11 - Good afternoon
JENNIFER BERTRAND - MASSACHUSETTS DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES COUNCIL - HB 1485 - Good afternoon, Chairman Day and members of the committee. My name is Jennifer Bertrand, and I am the disability policy specialist with the Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council, MDDC. As you may know, we are federally mandated to help educate policymakers. Citizen council member Cody Rooney and I are here today to talk to you about H 1485 and how it will help ensure the rights and dignity of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, IDD. The MDDC advocates for policies that removes barriers and increases opportunities for people with IDD to live as independently as possible in the community. Today, Cody asked me to repeat his words to ensure that you can understand his testimony today.
CODY ROONEY - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 1485 - Good afternoon. My name's Cody Rooney, I live in Amherst, Mass. I have cerebral palsy; I am a6101 student at UMass Amherst studying political science. I enjoy being the front seat driver of my life and being able to make a difference in my community where its outside or inside the classroom. Like anyone, I value the right to make choices about where I want to go, what I want to eat, what I want to wear, etcetera, I also value overseeing my education. I encounter discrimination daily, people make assumptions about my capabilities and underestimate me because of my disability due to the way I walk and talk. Societal disability stereotypes are often based on misinformation and are harmful to people with disabilities. Stereotypes can result in prejudice and exclusion like presuming we are totally helpless, unable to care for ourselves, or unable to make our own decisions.
I fought very hard to find my voice, and to be allowed to have my voice heard, it's a struggle, and we must fight tooth and nail to have the right to decide what happens in our life. Some people today still believe we are not capable of making choices, and I am here to tell you that we can. We deserve the right and dignity like anyone else to make decisions and have autonomy over our lives. The proposed SDM policy is designed to prevent abuse, it has more safeguards than creating a health care proxy or power of attorney so you can feel good about supporting this, Bill. Unlike guardianship, SDM agreements involve multiple people and require mandatory reporting as an added protection. Passing this Bill will ensure the rights and dignity of many people with disabilities. I ask you to support H 1485. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony both. Cody is a proud UMass alum, and I think speaker vice chair Barber as well. We look forward to welcoming you into the alumni family soon.
SPEAKER11 - I also have testimony his written testimony here Terrific. Picture and then also Tamara who testified early on half
SPEAKER1 - the Terrific. Thanks. You can hand that right up. We'll take it. Appreciate it both. We'll move on to Sandy Heller Kinney and Craig Kinney who are both testifying virtually.
SANDRA KINNEY - MASSACHUSETTS DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES COUNCIL - HB 1485 - Thank you, Chairman, and thank you members of this joint committee. First, I'd like to say, talking about support decision making, Craig decided today not to be here, he's done a number of hearings, and he's presented on SDM nationally and internationally. It was such a beautiful day that he decided to spend it having fun. Not that this isn't fun, but I give him again all right to make his own decision. So I'm here today in support of the House Bill 1485, an act relative to support decision making agreements for certain adults with disabilities. SDM allows adults, including those with disabilities and elders to maintain their rights, dignity, and independence by choosing one or more trusted support to provide assistance making decisions about their lives.
I am a proud parent of a 36-year-old man who happened to have been born with Down syndrome. I'm an appointed council member at the Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council as well. 18 years ago, when Craig turned 18, he and our family decided not to pursue formal guardianship. Craig's life is and always has been first presumed competent or the least restrictive. We're firm6607 believers that support decision making allows adults, including those with disabilities to maintain the right dignity and independence by choosing one or more trusted supporters to provide assistance making and deciding on decisions.
Today, I'm happy to say that Craig's support decision making works. He's been doing it for, again, over 18 years. He's chosen four people in his life, from family6630 caregivers and to other supporters in helping him and give him the opportunity to be included in deciding where he chooses to live, work, what he wants to do as he did today, who he wants to spend time with, and most importantly, receiving support needed to understand and communicate his medical needs. From Craig's early childhood to today, he's given the opportunity to be his own decision maker, he's proud and respected for being a registered voter, deciding where he lives with who, how he spends his own earned money from working, who he wants to spend time with, and most importantly, he's given the information and respect to understand all medical needs.
As a teenager, Craig endured and required life sustaining medical procedure, not one day went by that everyone around him, including his doctors and family informed, explained, and helped him through these difficult years. We all learn from own life experience, we all rely on others in our life to help us make decisions, my son is no different. You know, House Bill would establish a legal framework for SDMMS. This Bill defines establishes roles for everyone that supporters and people they can trust. The Bill creates protection against abuse and establish training for people involved using SDM. Federal organizations have also recommended endorsed using support decision making as an alternative to guardianship, include American Bar Association, National Guardianship Associations, The Arc of the United States, the US Department of Education, US Department of Health and Human Services and the National Council on Disability. It's not in place of guardianship, it's just a less option, and I ask the committee to vote yes today on this important less restrictive Bill to allow people the right to have these restrictive options. Thank you again for your consideration. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, for your testimony. Appreciate it very much. Any questions? Seeing none, thank you. I move on to David Clark, also testifying virtually for the Massachusetts Health Decision
SPEAKER23 - Health Decision.
DAVID CLARKE - MASSACHUSETTS HEALTH DECISIONS - HB 1485 - Chair Eldridge, Chair Day, I'm David Clarke, executive director of nonprofit Massachusetts Health Decisions, I urge your strong support of this supported decision-making Bill. Since 1991, when Mass Health decisions convene the Statewide Healthcare Proxy Task Force, MHD has been the lead agency to implement and promote the proxy. MHD has conducted 260 education programs for the public and clinicians. MHD has also responded to hundreds of inquiries from professionals and the public. In 33 years, here's some of what we've learned about decision making. Most people want to make their own decisions, and almost everyone seeks help from others before deciding. People don't want to give up their decision-making rights no matter what their level of ability.
Health and other professionals are reluctant to recognize agreements, requests for information, or the involvement of helpers unless recognized by statute. Neither the health care proxy nor guardianships reflect the way most people make their decisions. The proxy is6829 used mainly for end-of-life decisions, not day to day choices. People are skeptical of documents like powers of attorney that require legal help and many people simply don't have the skills, resources, physical mobility, or confidence to explore all of their own options and need practical help to do so.
The proposed SDM legislation would help people maintain the greatest possible level of personal autonomy. Unlike the proxy or powers of attorney, SDM agreements would allow persons with their chosen supporters to act on their own choices. The legislation recognizes that all people seek help when faced with difficult decisions. That helping relationship ought to be honored by other people, whether by a clinician, a bank officer, an apartment rental agent, an employer, or a lawyer. The legislation would clearly help people with disabilities, unquestioned. It would also help the many solo seniors who avoid seeking help if they think they could lose their independence and housing simply by revealing that they want help to make some important decisions.
Perhaps most importantly, this legislation is essential because it gives civil, criminal and professional immunity to people who in good faith recognize and act in reliance on an SDM agreement made with help from a chosen supporter. These protections as well as robust safeguards such as witnessing, notarization, and mandated reporting better ensure that a person will remain safe, and their supported decisions will be recognized and honored. 19 states have already enacted SDM laws, most recently Arizona and Alabama. Massachusetts citizens, both members of the public and professionals would be clear beneficiaries of this proposed legislation. Thank you so much for your consideration and for the opportunity to share my SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
thoughts.
Thank you, for your testimony, mister Clark. I believe we've now got Tamara Huntley remotely.
SPEAKER34 - Hello? Can6974 you hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Go right ahead. We've got6976 you.
SPEAKER34 - Hi.
TAMARA HUNTLEY - MASSACHUSETTS DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITY COUNCIL - HB 1485 - My name is Tamara Hundley, I live in Ludlow, Mass. I'm a lead trainer for the Massachusetts Developmental Disability Council. The council works to educate policy makers. Today, I'm here to testify on behalf of myself and my family regarding House Bill 1485, regarding supported decision making SDM agreements, Where the Bill is7008 MDDC7008 priority,7008 it's also very important to my family because I am a parent of an adult with a daughter who experiences IBD, this legislation would allow individuals like my daughter, Emily, to exercise their rights and be at the forefront of their destiny.
This law creates the framework for SDM as an alternative to guardianship. In my career, I train people with IDD to advocate for themselves and empower them to make choices. While Emily experiences IDD and a communication disorder with support from her trusted people that fit in her health, safety, and happiness, we can make many decisions about how she wants to live in her life. My daughter deserves the dignity of being self-directed and should be empowered to the greatest extent possible. She should be fully involved in making her own decisions with the help of people they trust.
SDM is an ideal option for Emily because guardianship would not necessarily limit her rights. SDM also allows her to be seen7094 as a person capable of making7096 her own decisions with guidance. SDM agreements are tailored to meet people's individual needs, and that's what is required. To prevent abuse and exploitation, this law has more protection than establishing power of attorney and medical proxies. It also contains mandatory reporting requirements.
Passage of this legislation would mean everything to Emily and would improve her life. As a human being, Emily deserves to be at the center of her decisions that impact her life just like we are. Her supporters can help her communicate her wishes. Supporting this Bill means you would support the rights and dignity of people with disabilities so they can live independently as possible. SDM is being used in 18 other states, and I believe it's time we get on board. You can feel good about supporting H 1485. Thank you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you7176 for your testimony, Tamara. Glad we, stuck with you as well. Appreciate it. Thank you. Alright. That'll close testimony on h 1485. Thank you all for your participation and patience on this. We'll move now to testimony on h 3763, and welcome representative Sally Terrence up. An act relative to health care proxy information.
SPEAKER27 - Mister chairman? Senator Lovely, I'm back on. Just
LOVELY - HB 1485 - SB 109 - Just to quickly testify in support of H 1485, supported decision making. I filed the companion Bill, Senate Bill S 109, which is in children and families. Just want to pledge my support, that's it. Thank you for letting me interrupt. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
My apologies to rep Kearns. Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Alright. Thank you. Rep Kearns?
SPEAKER20 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Welcome.
REP KERANS - HB 3763 - Thank you, Chair Day, Senator Eldridge, Senate chair, Vice Chair Barber. Thank you all for taking me out of turn, I will be brief. First, I just do want to say thank you, I'm so glad I've been listening to the really articulate, eloquent testimony of so many of our friends, neighbors, and residents in favor of supported decision making. I am here on7255 House 3763, and by way of background, this arose and came to my attention through my constituent, Mr. Howard Karas, who I believe has signed up, and you'll be hearing from him. As so often is the case, his experience with his father's health proxy led to this legislation. I am by no means an expert in this area, but I do know that the current set up, if you will, is lacking in7290 so far as, we don't have a requirement for7294 storing a proxy electronically with a medical record.
Howard will tell you why that became such a problem in his situation. The time lost looking for the proxy form is very costly and time spent and decision making. This will make it easier for medical providers to access a patient's proxy, by requiring hospitals and medical clinics to convert it into an electronically stored form. So, streamlining the process, we think, will be a reasonable approach to ensuring that the document that you've taken great pains to create to make sure you have it, that you can access it quickly and efficiently. So, with that, I ask that you listen to my constituent, and also I know that you're working in the whole area of proxies, I ask that you keep this7362 situation and this legislation in mind as you approach that work, and I thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, representative. Any questions from the committee? Seeing none, thanks very much. Appreciate it.
We'll stay with health care proxies, and we'll move back to that bill in a moment. But first, h 1398, enact relative to health care proxies. We welcome, Christine Simakauskas virtually.
SPEAKER19 - Good
SPEAKER38 - afternoon.
SPEAKER1 - Good afternoon. Go ahead.
SPEAKER38 - Yep.
CHRISTINE SIMAKAUSKUS - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 1398 - Thank you for allowing my testimony today, I am here to support Bill number 1398, presented by Donald Berthiaume. As a concerned health care worker in Central Massachusetts, sometimes the current health care proxy laws that are in effect don't always benefit all of the patients of Mass that need healthcare. Often a patient that may need to have medical attention, they may already have a healthcare proxy in place, and they might have developed a cognitive condition that now has changed and they no longer can change their healthcare proxy and they might have outlived their healthcare proxy. Some of the patients that we see in the area that I work also may have a legal guardian, and, unfortunately, if these patients are unlucky enough to have been admitted on a Friday afternoon, it is very hard for us to get in touch with the legal guardian to help us make decisions for them or to make their health care decisions, or maybe they're just elderly and they have outlived all of their family members, and then the court points a legal guardian for them.
Sometimes the legal guardians are not able to be reached in 48 hours, sometimes it's longer. Sometimes the health care facility has to apply for legal guardianship themselves after exhausting all terms to try to find and get in touch with the health care proxies or the legal guardians. I just would hope that if this Bill was allowed to progress, that we could open up dialogue that would clarify this and make guardianship and health care proxies more user friendly for the health care workers, and that the guardian would be held accountable to return calls in a timely manner and to be educated on the consequence of what happens to the patients when these calls go unanswered. Also, that legal guardianship not be treated as a business, but a personal and caring process that allows our patients to have dignity while they are in the hospital. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony. Any questions from members of the committee on this bill? Seeing none, thank you. Move to, Eric Nascimento, also on h 1398.
SPEAKER15 - I
SPEAKER1 - Not present? Alright.7558 Move on to, Danilo Navarro? Not present? Wendy Hajerny?
About, Anita Arcieri
or Courtney Perkins? Okay. We'll move back now to h 3763, an act relative to health care proxy information, And welcome Howard
SPEAKER25 - Karas.
SPEAKER1 - Go ahead, sir.
SPEAKER9 - Do you, hear me?
SPEAKER1 - We've got you. Go ahead.
SPEAKER9 - Okay.
HOWARD CARAS - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 3763 - Thank you, Senator Eldridge, Representative Day, and members of the joint committee, I want to thank you again for this opportunity to testify in favor of this Bill. I would like you to imagine that you have received a call that a loved one is being rushed to the ER, you immediately head to the ER, and when you get there, you find out that your loved one is in a semi-conscious state, unable to respond to the simplest of questions, including what their name is. As you being the designated proxy, you try to find out why you haven't received any calls whatsoever from those providing care, what you find out is that the health care proxy form is not even on their chart, they have no idea where it is. They've got the DNI, they've got medical allergies, they've got medical history, nothing but the proxy.
So, when they after they search for it, it takes almost two hours later, and only then are you being recognized for the possibility of being able to now start assisting the loved one in their care. What I find out is that there is no consistent manner in which these medical providers are required to file and retrieve the proxy form. I have heard them stored in file folders in back rooms, I have heard of them stored sometimes electronically, maybe, stored on microfiche, there's multiple different ways and they always seem to have to go with it, but they're never transported at all7705 with the patient where it7707 is needed, when it is needed. This was the exact scenario that happened to me. Back in 2016, about a month before my father passed away, he was being transported to one hospital.
By the time they traced them down and they found the health policy form, it was three hours before I could assist him in his help. He was completely unresponsive to care. I really7736 need your committee's constant consideration of this and a vote on this because this is a definite hole in the health care proxy situation that we really need to patch. We need health care proxies to be in the exact same form and methodology as DNIs. They need to be at the top of the medical care packet when it transported provider to provider whenever it's needed as opposed to expecting us, we carry paper copies in our wallets. I thank you for your time and your consideration. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, mister Garris, for your testimony and sharing your story as well. Any Questions from the committee members? Seeing none. Thank you, sir.
Now moving on to, h 1744. Welcome, filed by representative Roy,7796 an act relative to uniform partition of heir’s property. Welcome Chelsea Gazzillo from the American Farmland Trust.
SPEAKER16 - Sure.
SPEAKER1 - Oh, I apologize. I didn't see yeah. We had a mis testimony virtually, but please come forward professor Thomas Mitchell from Boston College Law School. We We're just a virtual testimony doc.
Right on queue.
THOMAS MITCHELL - BOSTON COLLEGE LAW SCHOOL - HB 1744 - Good afternoon, Chairs Eldridge and Day and fellow members of the joint committee. My name is Thomas Mitchell, and I'm a law professor at Boston College Law School. I'm here to testify in support of H 1744, the uniform partition of Heirs' Property Act. As a representative of the Uniform Law Commission, I served as the reporter or the principal drafter for the uniform partition of heir’s property act for the Uniform Law Commission. In Massachusetts, as elsewhere, heirs’ property is a very prevalent form of common real property ownership, and there are families from many racial and ethnic groups who own such property. In Massachusetts, heiress property owners include farmers and single-family homeowners in cities, suburbs, and rural communities.
It bears mentioning that black, Latino, and Native American families in the Commonwealth disproportionately, but not exclusively own heirs' property as a result of substantial racial and ethnic will making gaps. The UPHPA is an act that is designed to address abusive so-called partition actions, which have resulted in substantial property loss among heirs’ property owners. These forced sales have also stripped a substantial amount of generational wealth from these families, families that tend to be socially and economically disadvantaged. The UPHPA enhances the due process in private property rights for vulnerable families who own heirs’ property by increasing their ability to maintain ownership of their property in a partition action and by protecting their real estate wealth, including in those instances in which court order a forced sale.
The UPHPA contains three primary features that help families preserve their property and their wealth. First, it enables cotenants who want to maintain ownership of their property to buy out the fractional interest of a cotenant that seeks a forced sale of the property. Second, it reinforces the preference for a physical division of the property where possible by requiring courts to take into account both economic and noneconomic factors, including long standing ownership by a family, any cultural or historical significance of a property, and whether ordering a sale may undermine someone's lawful use, thereby resulting in a substantial lowering of their quality of housing.
Third, it replaces the judicial or auction sales process that often returns sale well below market value, sometimes a fire sale price with a new sales process that mimics a sale between a willing seller and a willing buyer. The UPHPA, as you've heard, has been broadly enacted, but it has been in the states that have enacted it, it's been working well, and has led to a reduction in the number of abusive partitioned actions filed, and it has preserved wealth. Finally, there are provisions in the federal farm bill that provide additional benefits to farmers who own heir's property in states have enacted the UPHPA into law. Thank you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, professor. Chair Milich.
SPEAKER2 - Yeah. Thank you, mister Ade. I just want to thank, professor Mitchell for coming to my office and talk to me in more detail about the bill and the history, around the partitioning. So, thank you so much for your years, decades of work, and thanks for coming for
SPEAKER1 - the committee. Appreciate it. Thank you. Seeing no further questions, appreciate it. Thank you very much.
Miss Gazelle?8067 We've got the wasn't we got a per panel here signed up with Jane Stornicki.
SPEAKER40 - Okay. Yeah. I'm here.
SPEAKER1 - Alright. Go right ahead.
JANE STERNECKY - UNIFORM LAW COMMISSION - HB 1744 - Good afternoon. My name is Jane Sternecky, and I'm legislative8080 counsel for the Uniform Law8082 Commission, where I work on the enactment of the uniform8084 partition of heir’s property act introduced here in H 1744. I thank Senator Payano and Professor Mitchell for each of their thorough overviews of this Act. First, the Uniform Law Commission is a nonprofit organization that was formed in 1892 to draft nonpartisan model legislation in the areas of the law where uniformity is preferred, the UPHPA was drafted over a period of two years by a panel of ULC commissioners and experts from stakeholders in the heir’s property community.
Since it was finalized in 2010, the UPHPA has been enacted in 23 jurisdictions, including Connecticut, New York, York, and Washington DC, with additional introductions planned for the coming legislative session. As discussed by Professor Mitchell, heirs’ property owners are vulnerable to outside actions from property developers and often see their properties sold at auction on the courthouse steps for significantly under market value. The Uniform Partition of Heirs' Property Act creates a series of due process protections that allow these vulnerable property owners to keep their ancestral land within the family whenever possible and the act ensures that when the land cannot be retained by the family, these families will receive fair market value for their property.
I'd like to give a little bit more detail on the Farm Bill, which professor Mitchell alluded to, but didn't have time to cover in-depth. So, while the UPHPA's protections generally apply only once a cotenant owner of a property has filed a partition action to divide up that property, the 2018 federal farm Bill gives additional benefits outside of an action to heir’s property owners in states that have enacted the UPHPA. If Massachusetts were to enact the UPHPA, the Farm Bill would create a path for heir’s property owners in Massachusetts to resolve issues with and it would also allow them to apply to receive a farm number. A farm number prevents farmers to participate in USDA programs, including farm service agency loans, disaster assistance, crop insurance, and other conservation programs. This act would significantly benefit property owners throughout the state of8204 Massachusetts. I thank you for your consideration, and I welcome your questions. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
8210 Terrific.8210 Thank you very much, miss Durnick. Any questions from the committee? Seeing none at this time. Thank you.
SPEAKER40 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - I'll move on to a, panel with Jonathan Schreiber and Melvin Viera From the Massachusetts Association of Realtors.
SPEAKER41 - Well,
MELVIN A. VIEIRA JUNIOR - MASSACHUSETTS ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS - HB 1744 - I want to thank you all very much. I want to thank Chair Day and Chair Eldridge and judiciary members. My name is Melvin A. Vieira Junior, and I am here to testify in support of the Bill 1744, an act related to uniform petition of heir's property on behalf of the Massachusetts Association of Realtors, a 96-year-old trade profession organization with over 26,000 members across the state. I grew up in Boston, and I have been a realtor for almost over 30 years, and I've been in many leadership positions in the Realtor Association, including serving as the board director of National Association Realtors as well as being the past President of The Greater Boston Real Estate Board.
My work has given me a front row seat to many of these challenges facing homeowners, those looking to buy a home in Boston and surrounding areas. Each property is perhaps a lesser known 1, But I witnessed the impact on the community and strong support of H 1744 as8293 a fix. Please see the written testimony for more details, but in brief, h 1744 provides procedural safeguards to those inherited property from the descendants without the wealth, so called in tenants in common are vulnerable because they're individual tenants of the real estate speculators who acquire small share and they can force the division of a fire seal for the entire property often for significantly less than its true value.
This occurs regardless of whether other tenants in the common live there or as the property for a familiar significance or the property was intended to provide a nest egg for future generations. H 1744 helps our heir to help protect their interest in sales and need to show the maximum value, return to maintain wealth. I want to focus on my testimony circumstance of against property abuse, and I have worked with many people who have actually went through it, and I've worked with people who were about to actually have this actual thing happen to them, but because I was able to refer them to certain people in the legal counsel to actually steer and help protect their interest, but the sad8373 part about it is they didn't know where to turn.
Thank God I've been doing this so long, but I've seen8377 so many different types of real estate transactions and been involved in some major things that I've recognized this happening. So, I plead and I please ask you all as a committee to look at this and really consider this because this is really true especially, I've seen it happen in the Dorchester, Mattapan, and Roxbury areas as well as well as even out in Lowell. So anyway, I want to thank you for your time, and I'm here and happy to answer any questions.
JONATHAN SCHREIBER - MASSACHUSETTS ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS - HB 1744 - Good afternoon. My name is Jonathan Schreiber, I'm counsel for the Massachusetts Association of Realtors. In addition to Melvin's testimony, I wanted to highlight a unique aspect of the Bill, that we believe would have a profound impact and potentially merit additional consideration for other policy discussions such as tax lien foreclosures, and that's the use of the open market sale. Open market sales continue to be, by far, the best way to sell a home.
Selling a home at a court ordered auction is akin to a fire sale. Your home will sell and, in a time, certain window, but very likely at a significant discount. Foreclosure sales, which are commonly completed through auction have historically sold for 20% to 36% lower than the overall median home sale. Based on our September 2023 market data, a 36% auction sale discount would mean a loss of $216,000 for the median Massachusetts home sale. While that number alone is shocking, consider as well that the home is often the largest8466 financial asset for most families8468 in the United States.
A 2020 Brookings Institute report found that housing represents approximately 50% to 70% of the total wealth held by most Americans. While the loss of home equity can have a significant impact on the overall net worth for any affected homeowner, the financial impact tends to be bigger for elderly and minority homeowners. For older homeowners, home equity makes up the majority of their net worth. For black and Hispanic homeowners, the equity that accrues through homeownership Makes up roughly 60% and 58% respectively of the owner's overall net worth compared to 43% for white homeowners. We know that the courts have historically voiced concerns that this Bill could slow their proceedings. It's hard to argue that an open market sale could possibly move as swiftly as an auction. However, we think the equity we stand to gain, both in terms of fairness and the preservation of generational wealth is well worth it. Thank you for the opportunity to testify, I'm happy to answer questions. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
if
SPEAKER1 - you Thank8527 you, both for your testimony. Any questions from the committee at this time? Seeing none, thank you very much. Now move to Chelsea Gazzillo from the American Farmland Trust.
Welcome.
CHELSEA GAZILLO - AMERICAN FARMLAND TRUST NEW ENGLAND - HB 1744 - Good afternoon, Senator Eldridge, Representative Day, and members of the joint standing judiciary committee. My name is Chelsea Gazillo, and I'm the American Farmland Trust New England policy manager. In addition, I live in Holyoke, Massachusetts. I appreciate the opportunity to testify8560 on behalf of American Farmland Trust in support of H 1744. AFT is the only national organization dedicated to protecting farmland, promoting sound farming practices, and keeping farmers on the land. Through our New England regional office located in Northampton, we've been doing this work in the region for 368581 years. In New England and across the country,
AFT is deeply committed to addressing land access and tenure issues that create impediments for historically marginalized young, beginning and, other marginalized farmers to achieve secure land ownership. I'm not going to go over the provisions of what this Bill does because I think doctor Mitchell and others did a really great job doing that, I will add that if passed, this Bill will give Massachusetts preference to receive USDA heirs’ property relending program loans.
This program was passed in the 2018 farm Bill, but it actually wasn't implemented until the summer of 2021, so the opportunity to take advantage of this money is timely. In our state, real estate continues to be an extraordinary expensive and difficult to access for historically marginalized and young and beginning farmers, as I mentioned. According to the 2023 National Agricultural Statistics Service, also known as NAS, land value survey, Massachusetts has the third most expensive farmland in the country after Rhode Island, and New Jersey with the average price of an acre of farmland being 15,300. Because agricultural land is so challenging to purchase, Massachusetts8665 must do everything we can to ensure that family farms are able to retain ownership of the land and continue production.
So, USDA recognizes that heir's property is the leading cause of black involuntary land loss. Through efforts like the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources, MDAR, Farmland Action Plan, the state is actively seeking ways to promote farmland access opportunities for bipoc seeking land, however, as a result of the historical end equities, bipoc may lack the resources necessary to do proper state planning and thus retain possession of property. Without systems in place to ensure that bipoc landowners are not subject to unjust processes, additional farmland8712 will be lost and thus create a8714 deeper divide in who owns and does not own farmland in our state. So, I will just close out by saying, we thank you for hearing this Bill today and hope that you will vote to support it. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony. Questions from the committee? See you then. Appreciate it. Thank you very much.
I'll now welcome forward Rishabh Rabamurti From the Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance.
RISHAB RAMAMURTHY - MASSACHUSETTS AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALLIANCE - HB 1744 - Good afternoon. My name is Rishab Ramamurthy, and I'm an organizer with the Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. MAHA is a statewide organization based in Boston, we're dedicated to educating and mobilizing people to break down barriers for first time and first-generation homebuyers and shrink the racial homeownership gap. We graduate about 2500 people each year from our first-time homebuyer classes. We run a growing match8776 savings and support program for first generation homebuyers and provide8780 post purchase classes to over 1000 people every year.8784 In addition, we organize our graduates to advocate for policies and funding that will help them build and buy and maintain their homes. So, MAHA strongly supports H 1744, an act relative to uniform partition of heirs' property. This legislation will provide a safeguard against the unfair dispossession of wealth and property from moderate income homeowners in urban areas, farmers, and indigenous communities.
MAHA's advocacy aims to help families purchase a home and build generational wealth. We work with nonprofit organizations across the state to establish and strengthen mortgage products and assist in programs that stabilize neighborhoods and promote financial stability. These programs have enabled countless Massachusetts residents to achieve homeownership. However, these advances are threatened when our laws do not support community members with less access to legal services and estate planning. Our law should protect our goal to put sustainable homeownership within reach of low to moderate income residents. We urge you to immediately vote the act out favorably and do all that is within your power to get it passed. We must make sure that hardworking families do not lose their homes in unfair legal proceedings. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, moo mister Ramarthi. Any questions from the committee? Seeing none, thanks very much. And I'll go virtually8860 to Matt Brooks from Greater Boston Legal Services.
MATTHEW BROOKS - GREATER BOSTON LEGAL SERVICES - HB 1744 - Good afternoon,8866 Chairs Eldridge, Day and members of the committee, thanks for allowing me to testify today. My name is Matt Brooks, I'm the managing attorney of Greater Boston Legal Services consumer rights unit. I'm here to testify in favor of8879 H 1744, an act8881 relative to the uniform partition of heir’s property.8883 The committee should report favorably on this Bill because it would create just default partition rules that will allow low- and moderate-income families and particularly families of color to remain housed and preserve generational wealth. Greater Boston Legal Services is one8899 of the very few legal services organizations across the state that8903 provides free representation to low- and moderate-income homeowners as opposed to tenants in actions where people stand to lose their homes.
The clients we serve and the clients this Bill will protect Cannot afford the hourly rates of private lawyers. A constant concern of our clients, even when they're facing homelessness themselves, is how they can preserve the value of their home for generations. Our clients are without fail, house rich, and cash poor, and their homes occupy a place of importance far above what the fair market value of their8932 ownership interest would indicate. For our clients, owning a home is a foothold8936 in the middle class for themselves and their8938 children.
Greater Boston Legal Services has unfortunately seen families lose that foothold because of our state's partition rules. For example, we have one client whom we've represented for years. We had secured what should have been a stable housing situation for her after a long fight, but a partition action now threatens her with homelessness. After the untimely death of her8959 co-owner, certain heirs who are distant relatives that have never lived in our client's home are seeking our partition by sale. As the law stands, our client has no realistic way to prevent the sale of her home in the face of these individuals' wish to extract money from a property that's simply a windfall to them, not a8976 place to raise a family or to grow old in financial security.
Under current law, it's likely that our client's home will be sold using sale procedures where nothing close to its fair market value would be realized and where investors or flippers seeking a profit stand the greatest chance of ending up owning what should be a family home. H 1744, an act relative to the uniform partition of heir’s property would vastly increase our client's chances of staying in our home. Please report favorably on H 1744, it is fair, just, and sensible solution for preserving existing housing and maintaining intergenerational wealth in vulnerable communities. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, attorney Brooks, for your testimony. Any questions from the committee at this time? Seeing none, thank you very much. That will close testimony for h 1744, an act relative to uniform partition of heir’s property, those who've signed up. We'll move on now to consideration of h 1748 s 930 filed by representative Roy and senator Cream, enact relative to his access to a decedent's electronic mail accounts. And welcome virtually Charles Glick.
SPEAKER12 - Hello, mister chairman. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Welcome. Gotcha. Go ahead.
SPEAKER12 - It's good to be with you in
CHARLES GLICK - CHARLES GROUP CONSULTING - HB 1748 - SB 930 - HB 1641 - Chairman Day, Chairman Eldridge, I appreciate the opportunity to testify9052 in support of Senate 930 and House 1748, an act relative to access to a decedent's electronic mail accounts filed by Senator Creem and Rep Roy. My name is Charles Glick, I'm the principal of Charles Group Consulting. I and my colleagues feel so fortunate to represent a range of extraordinary nonprofit clients and their important issues and concerns. Today, I'm here to testify on behalf of our clients, Robert and Marianna Jamien, who unfortunately couldn't be here today in support of these two Bills, as well as an opposition to House 1641 as it is presently written. Robert and his sister, Mary Anne, tragically lost their brother to a reckless driver, a couple of weeks after his death, they were planning a memorial service for him and wanted to invite all of his friends.
The brother had an email account with a popular service provider, they contacted the service provider, and as the next of kin, I can assume that they would have access to his account in the same way that they had access to other items of his. After all, if their brother had a safety deposit box, they would have the right9116 to inherit that as well. Why should email be different? The only reason it was different is because the law has not kept pace with technology, leaving a loophole that one internet service provider chose to exploit. We began looking at the issue, and we found out that indeed many other families have the same experience. A family of a US Marine killed in a roadside bomb in Iraq denied access to their fallen son's email account.
Robert and Mary Anne didn't just file legislation to correct this loophole in Massachusetts, or to press their legal case, they went to Washington and lobby to create a uniform law. The 2014 uniform fiduciary access to digital assets act or new FADA, gave an executor the same right to access the decedent's person's account, as the deceased person had during life. That's the framework for the Bill that you have in front of you, the Creem Bill and the9169 Roy Bill. Many states chose to introduce legislation based on that model, however, the internet service providers, when they realized they may lose access to this information, decided that they would change that, oppose those Bills, and pass a revised Bill. Their revised Bill takes away the executor's authority, in cases where there isn't explicit consent to the disclosure.
That change is significant because 2/3 of Massachusetts citizens will die without a will, and that decision of what to do with their digital assets will rest solely with big corporate internet service providers, affecting the poor young people, people who don't have access to hire a lawyer. Finally, if the legislature were to pass House 1640 unamended, the legislature would effectively overturn a 2017 SJC decision establishing an important property right. The SJC has recognized that individual estates have a fundamental property right in the content of digital accounts. The SJC was particularly concerned with creating a class of digital assets that could not be marshaled. We stand ready to work with you, as well as with the internet service providers to pass a piece of legislation that balances all of these important needs but doesn't adversely impact 2/3 of the population in Massachusetts. Thank you so much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, for your testimony, mister Glick. Any questions from members of the committee? Seeing none at this time. Appreciate your time and patience.
SPEAKER10 - Thanks so much.
SPEAKER1 - That'll close. Testimony on h 1748 s 930. We'll move now to consideration and testimony on h 3939 s 2398 followed by representative O'Day, senator Lovely, an act relative to the well-being of new mothers and infants, and welcome doctor Susan, I apologize. Doctor Susan Benjamin Feingold, virtually.
Alright. Welcome back to doctor Feingold. We'll welcome, Jess Pearson virtually. No? How about doctor Margaret Spinelli virtually?
SPEAKER46 - I am back here. I'm sorry so much, but I can talk to doctor.
SPEAKER1 - I believe that's doctor Feingold.
SPEAKER46 - Can you hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Yep. Is this doctor Feingold?
SPEAKER46 - Yes. It is. Hi.
SPEAKER1 - Right ahead.
SPEAKER35 - Talked about.
SUSAN FEINGOLD - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 3939 - SB 2398 - Good afternoon. I'm doctor Susan Feingold, I'm a clinical psychologist, and I've been treating Women with pregnancy and postpartum illness mental illness for over 31 years, and I'm honored to be here today. I hope you could support9338 this comprehensive and important Bill. So, one in seven mothers experience postpartum depression or anxiety in night space, really curled, after giving birth, and what that is, it's 800,000 to 900,000 women in the US alone. Worldwide, we know that women are particularly susceptible to mental illness surrounding childbirth due to multiple factors, genetics, neurobiology, psychological and social factors, and changing hormone levels, which alter greater function and can lead to maternal mental illness. Compared to white women, black women are twice as likely to experience maternal mental health condition like depression, but only 1/2 is likely to receive treatment in the US. What's9402 also disturbing is that no one has studied racial or ethnic minority women versus Caucasian women with postpartum psychosis within the continuum of perinatal mental illness, postpartum psychosis is universally agreed to be the most severe mental illness.
It affects one to 1000 women after childbirth, half of these women have no history at all of mental illness. Yet those with postpartum psychosis did that that group, 4% to 5% and 1% to 4% committed. Maternal mortality is a critical indicator of the quality of maternal health care in the country, and psychosis associated with, it's really linked to, in fact, decide this of the US and the world. Despite these armed facts and cope with depression are temperamental, these women get well, identify and treated immediately by mental health providers who specialize in the sickness. This comprehensive part of building work considering the quality of maternal, animal health care in Massachusetts. H 3939 and 2398 wanted to go up being a public citizen. Now provide prevention and case treatment that save the lives of mothers. Thank you for your consideration. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
I hope you
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, doctor Feingold, for your, testimony and your patience in offering it. Move again to is Jess Pearson online? Nope. About doctor Margaret Spinelli?
SPEAKER28 - Okay. Can you hear me and see me? It's doctor Spinelli.
SPEAKER1 - We've got you go right ahead, doctor.
SPEAKER28 - Okay.
MARGARET SPINELLI - COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHIATRY - HB 3939 - SB 2398 - Good afternoon, Representative O'Day and committee members. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of mothers and babies. I'm a perinatal psychiatrist, and I am a professor of psychiatry at Columbia. For 30 years, I have treated pregnant and postpartum women with psychiatric illness. Specifically, I'm talking about today postpartum psychosis, which is a very serious illness, in which women lose contact with reality. I have testified in court for more than 30 women with postpartum psychosis, accused of killing their babies. While psychotic, they lost contact with reality, not one that I saw was correctly diagnosed and treated. In the US, these women often receive a life sentence in prison, yet most European countries treat them instead of punish them. A mother suffering in a psychotic episode is in a world dominated by sounds envisions that only she can experience. The real world does not exist, hallucinations take the form of threatening images and commanding voices that control her thoughts and actions, other symptoms include profound confusion and thought disorganization.
An example of a case is 2001, Andrea Yates was commanded by Satan to drown her children to send them to heaven where he would take them immediately to hell. Like a good mother, she drowned them and placed them on the bed with their9641 arms around each other for their journey to heaven. Years of neuroscience research have verified that postpartum psychosis is a biological illness, it is not antiquated Freudian psychological episode. The research demonstrates the complex interaction9661 of neurochemistry and genetics, immune, and hormone events. The first biological event is hormone withdrawal at the time of childbirth that generates modifications in brain chemicals, which then creates psychiatric symptoms. The identical immune system, brain, and genetic changes in these women proves that this is9688 a physiologic process. Like people with other physical genetic disorders such as hemophilia, these women require treatment, not a life sentence. Postpartum psychosis is a temporary illness that is easily treated and easily prevented in future pregnancies with psychiatric medications. I sincerely request that you pass this9715 act to improve diagnosis,9717 treatment, and save the lives of mothers and babies. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, doctor Spinelli, for your testimony, your work, and, your patience in offering that testimony as well. Any questions from members of the committee? Seeing none, thank you very much.
SPEAKER28 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - And we'll close testimony on h 3939 and s 2398. We'll move now to testimony on h 1470 from representative Donahue, an act designating right of disposition, And welcome Matthew Stevens from the Mount Auburn Cemetery. Test live virtually.
MATTHEW STEPHENS - MOUNT AUBURN CEMETERY - HB 1470 - Good, afternoon, Chairman Eldridge, Chairman Day. My name is Matthew Stevens, and I'm the President and CEO of Mount Auburn Cemetery located at 580 Mount Auburn Street.9774 I am here today to testify in support of H 1470, an act designating right of disposition. In the Mount Auburn Cemetery, it was established in 1831 with a most ambitious vision to create an extraordinary place, an active cemetery as well as an urban green space, public garden and historic site open to the public year-round at no cost. Anyone of any walk of life can9802 come to Mount Auburn to find solace and the public always comes to9806 find inspiration.
Mount Auburn has a mission of protecting and preserving the history, monuments, structures, and stories of our permanent residents who have made up our community for over 190 years. Currently, Massachusetts only allows next of kin or those who are legally married to sign final disposition authorizations. Today, that authorization allows cemeteries to perform a traditional casket burial, cremation, or perhaps additional environmentally friendly disposition of those currently under review if passed by the legislature. The reality of this limitation9844 means that a partner or someone who has been a significant part of someone's life for decades or years is not allowed to designate their final disposition methods even though they may be the person who knows best what that deeply9862 personal and final choice might be.
In some cases, the current limitation puts the profound and permanent decision back in the hands of an estranged son, daughter, past partner, or other family, not always someone who is most qualified simply because they're not legally recognized as being married. Unfortunately, dedicated Mount Auburn staff are currently at the forefront of communicating those very complex and difficult discussions with loved ones. If passed, this Bill would allow the same rights of a married partner to be authorized to sign final disposition paperwork and be recognized by the State of Massachusetts. No one understands this personal choice more than we do at Mount Auburn. We9909 respect, accommodate, and welcome the wishes9911 of clients from all walks of life and religious denominations just as we have done since our founding over 190 years ago. We believe that by expanding designees for disposition, Massachusetts moves closer to a more equitable approach to end-of-life care. We hope the committee will vote this Bill out of committee favorably. Thank you for your time9931 and attention to this very important issue.9933 SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for9935 your testimony, mister Stevens, and your patience, in offering it. Any questions for members9939 of the committee? Seeing9941 none at this time. Thank you very much. Appreciate9943 it. Thank you. Alright. That will conclude, testimony on age 1470 as well as the other bills before us today in today's probate and family law, hearing. Thank you everyone who took the time to participate. Geraldridge, thank you. Other committee members, vice chair Barber,9959 and others who appeared virtually, appreciate9961 it. If you'd like to follow-up with any testimony, you may do so through written form, Again, to the judiciary committee research director Michael Mustow atmichael.mustow@mahouse.gov.
© InstaTrac 2025