Abstract

A guardian has a fiduciary relationship to the ward, but what exactly does that mean? Certainly a guardian is expected to act in the best interests of the ward, but how are those interests determined? Guardians are encouraged to act just as the ward would, but that implies that a guardian is closer to being an agent of the ward than a fiduciary. Yet a guardian must reconcile that agent like duty with obligations to the court who appointed him. In light of the perceived value of implementing the wishes of the ward, increasingly, appointing courts have come to treat guardians less as agents of the court and more as agents of the ward.