What is the standard of evidence that shows a guardian's appointment is in the best interest of the proposed ward?

The standard of evidence required to demonstrate that a guardian's appointment is in the best interest of the proposed ward is clear and convincing evidence. This standard is significantly higher than a mere preponderance of the evidence, which only requires that the evidence shows that something is more likely true than not. Clear and convincing evidence demands a greater degree of certainty in the information presented, ensuring that the decision to appoint a guardian is well-founded and based on strong, compelling evidence that aligns with the welfare of the proposed ward.

This standard is particularly critical in guardianship cases, as the implications of appointing a guardian involve significant limitations on an individual's rights and autonomy. The use of clear and convincing evidence thus serves to protect the rights of individuals by ensuring that all decisions made are in their best interest, supported by a thorough examination of the evidence available.

Options such as probable cause, a reasonable assumption, or a written testament from family do not meet the rigorous requirements needed in guardianship proceedings, as they lack the strength and reliability required to uphold such a significant intervention in an individual's life.