True or False: Guardianship should enhance the decision-making autonomy of an individual.

Guardianship is a legal relationship in which a court appoints an individual (the guardian) to make decisions on behalf of another person (the ward) who is deemed not capable of making those decisions independently. The main intention behind guardianship is to protect individuals who may be vulnerable due to various reasons, such as mental incapacity or severe disabilities.

In considering whether guardianship should enhance decision-making autonomy, it is critical to understand that the nature of guardianship often limits an individual's autonomy rather than enhancing it. When a guardian is appointed, they typically take over significant aspects of a person's decision-making, potentially infringing on the ward's ability to make choices about their own life, ranging from healthcare to financial matters.

While guardianship may provide necessary support and protect individuals from harmful decisions, it does not inherently enhance the ward's autonomy. This limitation is particularly concerning as it can lead to a situation where the representative makes decisions that may not align with the individual’s preferences or desires, thus further constraining their autonomy.

Therefore, the correct response is that it is false to claim that guardianship should enhance decision-making autonomy, as the nature of guardianship is inherently about transferring decision-making authority from the individual to the guardian.