Delaware Senate Bill SB93

Delaware 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/8/25
• Refer: 4/8/25
• Engrossed: 5/15/25
• Refer: 5/20/25
• Enrolled: 6/26/25

Caption

An Act To Amend Title 12, Title 16, Title 21, And Title 31 Of The Delaware Code Relating To Third-party Decision Making.

Impact

If enacted, SB93 will have significant implications for how healthcare and financial decisions are made for incapacitated individuals. The bill aims to ensure that individuals' rights are respected when they cannot make decisions for themselves, enhancing the responsibilities of public guardians and surveilling entities. By standardizing terms and processes related to decision making, the bill promotes consistency in legal interpretation and enforcement across related statutes. This could lead to improved outcomes for residents relying on surrogate decision makers, as the laws will be in better alignment with contemporary practices.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 93 (SB93) aims to amend various sections of the Delaware Code pertaining to third-party decision making, particularly focusing on health-care decisions and the roles of surrogates and public guardians. The bill introduces changes in terminology, aligns definitions with recent legislative updates, and clarifies the conditions under which a public guardian may be appointed. These amendments seek to simplify and better define the roles and responsibilities of those making decisions on behalf of individuals who lack decision-making capacity. It emphasizes the authority granted to agents under advance healthcare directives.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB93 appears to be largely neutral to positive among stakeholders. Supporters view the updates as necessary modernizations that align with best practices in healthcare and legal decision-making. However, some concerns may arise about the adequacy of protections for residents' rights and the qualifications of decision makers designated under the new definitions. The discussions reflect the need for careful implementation to ensure that the rights of individuals are not only preserved but also enhanced in practical terms.

Contention

A notable point of contention may arise regarding the definition and appointment of surrogate decision makers. While the bill enhances clarity in establishing who qualifies as a surrogate, there are concerns about the adequacy of oversight and standards for appointing individuals as surrogates or public guardians. Stakeholders will need to monitor the practical effects of these amendments to ensure that they do not inadvertently undermine the rights and best interests of those they are intended to protect.