N.Y. MHY Law § 82.04

* § 82.04 Scope.\n (a) If a decision-maker voluntarily enters into a supported\ndecision-making agreement with one or more supporters, the\ndecision-maker may, in the agreement, authorize the supporter to provide\nsupport to them in making their own decisions in areas they choose,\nincluding, but not limited to: gathering information, understanding and\ninterpreting information, weighing options and alternatives to a\ndecision, considering the consequences of making a decision or not\nmaking it, participating in conversations with third parties if the\ndecision-maker is present and requests their participation,\ncommunicating the decision-maker's decision to third parties if the\ndecision-maker is present and requests their participation, and\nproviding the decision-maker support in implementing the\ndecision-maker's decision.\n (b) Nothing in this article, nor the existence of an executed\nsupported decision-making agreement, shall preclude the decision-maker\nfrom acting independently of the supported decision-making agreement or\nexecuting, with or without the assistance of supporters under a\nsupported decision-making agreement, a power of attorney under title\nfifteen of article five of the general obligations law, health care\nproxy under article twenty-nine-C of the public health law, or other\nadvance directive.\n (c) Notwithstanding the existence of a supported decision-making\nagreement, a decision-maker shall continue to have unrestricted access\nto their personal information without the assistance of a supporter.\n (d) Notwithstanding the existence of a supported decision-making\nagreement, a decision-maker may request and receive assistance in making\nany decision that is not covered under the supported decision-making\nagreement at any time and from any person, regardless of whether that\nperson is designated as a supporter in the supported decision-making\nagreement.\n (e) A supported decision-making agreement made pursuant to this\narticle may be evidence that the decision-maker has a less restrictive\nalternative to guardianship in place.\n (f) The availability of supported decision-making agreements is not\nintended to limit the informal use of supported decision-making, or to\npreclude judicial consideration of such informal arrangements as less\nrestrictive alternatives to guardianship.\n (g) Execution of a supported decision-making agreement may not be a\ncondition of participation in any activity, service, or program.\n (h) If a decision-maker seeks from any person professional advice that\nwould be otherwise covered by evidentiary privilege in accordance with\nsections forty-five hundred three, forty-five hundred four, forty-five\nhundred seven, forty-five hundred eight and forty-five hundred ten of\nthe civil practice law and rules, the inclusion in the conversation of a\nsupporter authorized by the supported decision-making agreement to\nprovide support in the area in which the decision-maker seeks the\nprofessional advice shall not constitute a waiver of that privilege.\n (i) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary,\nnothing within this article shall be construed to prohibit eligibility\nof a decision-maker for receipt of services or supports that they would\nhave otherwise been entitled, including adult protective services,\nabsent entering into a supported decision-making agreement under the\nprovisions of this article.\n (j) A supported decision-making agreement made between a\ndecision-maker and his or her supporter or supporters after consultation\nand education, which is signed by a facilitator shall have the legal\nforce and effect authorized under section 82.11 of this article.\n * NB Effective 90 days from the date that the regulations issued in\naccordance with § 1 of chapter 481 of 2022 appear in the New York State\nRegister or the date such regulations are adopted, whichever is later.\n