Louisiana Supported Decision-Making: The Dustin Gary Act and SDMA Requirements

A Legal Framework That Preserves Rights

When a young adult with a disability turns 18 in Louisiana, parents face a decision that affects the rest of their child's life: how to establish legal decision-making support without stripping away fundamental civil rights. Continuing tutorship and interdiction both work by transferring authority away from the individual. Supported Decision-Making does the opposite — it leaves all rights with the person and adds a legally recognized support structure around them.

The Dustin Gary Act (La. R.S. 13:4261.101–13:4261.302), enacted in 2020, formally establishes Supported Decision-Making Agreements (SDMAs) in Louisiana law. Named after Dustin Gary, a Louisiana self-advocate, the law means that SDMAs are not informal family arrangements — they are legally recognized documents that give supporters a formal role in helping institutions, healthcare providers, and financial organizations work with the Decision-Maker.

How an SDMA Works

Under a Supported Decision-Making Agreement, the individual with a disability is the Decision-Maker. They designate one or more trusted people as Supporters. The supporters' role is specifically defined and limited:

• Help the Decision-Maker gather relevant information
• Assist in understanding options and consequences
• Help communicate the Decision-Maker's own decisions to third parties
• Supporters may not make decisions on the Decision-Maker's behalf

The agreement specifies exactly which areas of life the supporters will assist with. This can include medical care, residential decisions, employment matters, financial management, or any combination. The scope is customizable — a supporter might help with healthcare decisions but not financial ones, for example.

Formal Requirements for a Valid SDMA

Louisiana law sets specific formatting and execution requirements. An SDMA that doesn't meet these can be challenged or rejected by institutions:

• Written agreement: Must be a formal written document (not verbal)
• Named parties: Must identify the Decision-Maker and at least one Supporter with contact information
• Defined scope: Must describe with particularity the areas where assistance is authorized — vague language like "all decisions" is insufficient
• Signatures: Must be signed by the Decision-Maker and all designated Supporters
• Notarization: Must be fully notarized by a Louisiana Notary Public

The notarization requirement is non-negotiable. An un-notarized SDMA may represent the family's genuine intentions, but it lacks the legal enforceability that makes institutions cooperate. Louisiana notary publics are authorized under state law and operate differently from notaries in common-law states — they have broader powers and their notarization carries significant legal weight.

HB 362: Schools Must Now Inform Families

Effective August 1, 2024, Louisiana House Bill 362 (codified at La. R.S. 17:1944) requires local education agencies to provide written information about SDMAs, continuing tutorship, and interdiction to parents during transition planning.

Specifically, school districts must distribute this information at the first IEP meeting of the school year for students aged 14 through 17 who participate in alternate assessments. The requirement applies to the school — families don't need to request it.

This is significant because the most common reason families miss the continuing tutorship deadline or don't learn about SDM options is simply that no one told them. HB 362 shifts the burden of awareness from parents researching on their own to schools delivering the information proactively.

When SDM Works — and When It Doesn't

SDM is a strong fit when the individual:

• Has the cognitive capacity to understand the concept of a support relationship
• Can express preferences (verbally, through sign language, through assistive technology, or through other communication methods)
• Wants to maintain independence and civil rights
• Has trusted people available to serve as supporters
• Faces decisions that can be made with support rather than substituted judgment

SDM is not appropriate when the individual:

• Cannot meaningfully participate in the decision-making process even with maximum support
• Faces situations where immediate decisions must be made and the individual cannot be consulted
• Is making decisions that endanger their own safety and refusing all support
• Needs someone with legal authority to sign contracts, consent to surgery, or manage finances on their behalf

The key question is capacity, not convenience. SDM requires that the Decision-Maker can engage with the process — not that they can make decisions entirely independently, but that they can participate with support. Many people with intellectual disabilities who would have been placed under interdiction a decade ago are excellent candidates for SDM.

SDM and the Courts

The Dustin Gary Act includes a provision with real teeth: before granting an interdiction petition, a Louisiana court must now consider whether an SDMA would sufficiently protect the individual's interests. This means that judges are not supposed to grant interdiction as a default when a less restrictive option exists.

For families who missed the continuing tutorship deadline and are considering interdiction, this provision creates a practical consideration. If the adult child has the capacity for SDM, a court may decline to grant full interdiction and suggest an SDMA instead — or grant only limited interdiction covering the specific areas where the individual truly cannot participate in decisions.

What SDM Does Not Replace

An SDMA does not give supporters the legal authority that comes with tutorship, curatorship, or representative payee status:

• It does not authorize supporters to manage SSI funds — the Social Security Administration requires a separate representative payee appointment for that
• It does not give blanket medical consent authority — supporters help the Decision-Maker understand medical options and communicate their decisions, but the Decision-Maker gives their own consent
• It does not override the Decision-Maker's choices — if the Decision-Maker ultimately makes a decision their supporters disagree with, the supporters cannot override it

For families who need both SDM and representative payee authority, the two can coexist. The SDMA covers the broad spectrum of life decisions; the representative payee appointment (through SSA) covers federal benefit management specifically.

The Louisiana SSI at 18 & Adult Disability Benefits Guide covers all three decision-making frameworks — continuing tutorship, interdiction, and supported decision-making — alongside the federal benefit protections, so families can match the right legal structure to their child's actual capabilities and needs.

See more Louisiana guides →