Louisiana House Bill HB350

Louisiana 2016 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/2/16
• Refer: 3/2/16
• Refer: 3/14/16
• Report Pass: 4/5/16
• Engrossed: 4/26/16
• Refer: 4/27/16
• Report Pass: 5/3/16
• Enrolled: 5/10/16
• Chaptered: 5/19/16
• Passed: 5/19/16

Caption

Prohibits certain persons from preventing or limiting communication, visitation, or interaction with others

Impact

The proposed changes will significantly modify the existing legal framework governing interdicts, introducing measures to protect their right to communication and interaction. It provides clear guidelines for curators regarding their responsibilities and the extent of their authority over interdicts. The bill ensures that any limitations on communication must be approved by a court and based on a demonstrated need, thereby emphasizing the autonomy and rights of the individuals affected under these legal statutes.

Summary

House Bill 350 seeks to amend provisions in the Louisiana Civil Code and Code of Civil Procedure related to the rights of persons under guardianship, specifically focusing on individuals deemed 'interdicts' due to incapacity or legal restrictions. The bill prohibits curators or mandataries from preventing or limiting reasonable communication, visitation, or interaction between an interdict and certain relatives or individuals with a close personal relationship, thus aiming to enhance the interdict's rights and maintain personal relationships that are essential for emotional wellbeing.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 350 appears overwhelmingly positive based on voting history, as evidenced by the unanimous support it received in the Senate, where it passed with 35 votes in favor and none against. This strong approval suggests a broad recognition of the importance of preserving the rights of interdicts and the protective intent of the bill is welcomed by legislators across party lines.

Contention

While the bill aims to empower interdicts and safeguard their rights, there might be concerns regarding the balance of authority between curators and the rights of the interdicts. Critics could argue about the practical challenges in enforcing these new provisions. Furthermore, there may be questions on how to fairly assess the 'good cause' for restricting communication or visitation, indicating there could be areas for future legislative refinement to ensure the intent of the bill is effectively realized.