VA CAN NOW ASK COURTS TO APPOINT GUARDIANS FOR SOME VETERANS’ MEDICAL DECISIONS

A Veteran can be medically stable and still unable to leave the hospital.

Not because treatment failed. Not because there is no next step. But because no one is legally able to say yes to what comes next.

There is no spouse. No adult child. No named health care agent. No one the system can call to authorize rehab, long-term placement, or another transition in care.

The Department of Veterans Affairs says it is trying to close that gap with a new agreement announced in March. Under that memorandum of understanding with the Department of Justice, certain VA attorneys can now be appointed as special assistant U.S. attorneys so they can initiate and participate in state court guardianship or conservatorship proceedings for a limited category of Veterans who cannot make medical decisions and have no available legal decision-maker.

What the New Agreement Actually Does

The agreement does not give the VA unilateral power to take over a Veteran’s medical life. It does not create a new federal guardianship system. And it does not let VA staff simply appoint someone on their own.

It does give the VA a clearer path into existing state courts. The DOJ can appoint certain VA attorneys as special assistant U.S. attorneys, and those attorneys can then initiate or participate in state guardianship or conservatorship cases when a legal decision-maker is needed for post-acute transitions of care or related medical decisions. The judge still decides whether guardianship is warranted, and the court, not the VA, appoints the guardian or conservator.

The Best Sitrep for Today's Vets.

Benefits intel, military tech, field-tested gear, untold stories of those who served, and history like you've never heard before. Sign up for the VeteranLife newsletter.

​

Subscribe

Always free. 🇺🇸 | Unsubscribe anytime.

That distinction is at the legal epicenter of the whole story. The government is not claiming a new federal right to assign itself control over Veterans. What it’s actually doing is claiming a more direct route to ask a state court to intervene in cases where no surrogate exists.

Who This Applies to and Who it Doesn’t

According to the VA and DOJ, the agreement is aimed at Veterans who are unable to make their own health care decisions and have no family or legal representation to help them. The VA has said this includes some Veterans who are homeless or at-risk of homelessness, especially when discharge or continued care requires someone with legal authority to make decisions.

Inside VA ethics guidance, this population is often described as “unbefriended” Veterans, or people who lack decision-making capacity, do not have advance directives in place, or power of attorney, and have no family or friends available to serve as surrogate decision-makers. That guidance notes that, outside emergencies, legal guardianship for medical decision-making may be needed in some of those cases.

Just as important is who this doesn’t apply to. The VA’s informed-consent regulation already recognizes other decision-makers before guardianship, including a health care agent named in an advance directive, a legal guardian, next of kin, or in some circumstances a close friend.

So if a Veteran has an available surrogate under the VA’s existing framework, this agreement is not supposed to bypass that person.

What Was Happening Before This Agreement

The VA has already had procedures in place for patients who lack decision-making capacity and do not have a surrogate. In its December 2023 informed-consent directive, VHA laid out steps for clinicians to identify a surrogate and described involvement from VA counsel in some cases when a guardian may be needed.

The VA also acknowledged in its FY2025 budget materials that it lacked clear authority to petition state courts for appointment of a guardian or conservator in some of these cases. That is an important piece of the accountability story. The department itself told Congress there was a legal gap. This agreement appears to be the mechanism the VA and DOJ are using to address it.

So, this is not a story about the VA suddenly discovering vulnerable patients. It is a story about the VA trying to fix a bottleneck it says has already been leaving some Veterans stuck inside facilities longer than medically necessary.

This is not a mass-policy scenario affecting every Veteran in VA care. VA officials said the process is meant to help roughly 700 Veterans hospitalized at VA facilities who are unable to transition to more appropriate settings because they cannot make decisions and have no family or legal representation.

Why Advocates Are Uneasy

On the surface, the official case for the agreement is easy to understand. A Veteran who cannot decide, has no surrogate, and cannot be safely discharged is vulnerable in a very real way. But guardianship is one of the most sweeping legal interventions the state can impose on an adult.

Depending on the case, it can shift control over medical decisions, living arrangements, and sometimes finances. That is why the reaction from advocacy groups was immediate and full-force.

The National Coalition for Homeless Veterans urged clear oversight, strong due-process protections, and close coordination with community providers. Paralyzed Veterans of America said it is concerned about the implications of the agreement for Veterans with disabilities and raised civil-rights concerns about guardianship and conservatorship proceedings.

Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund warned the MOU threatens disability rights and argued the policy could move disabled veterans into restrictive arrangements they may not need. Ranking Member Mark Takano sharply criticized the move as an effort that could strip vulnerable veterans of voice, freedom, and independence.

The Legal Guardrails That Still Matter

The most important guardrail is still the simplest one, guardianship is supposed to come after other options fail. The VA’s own regulation recognizes advance directives and surrogate decision-makers. That means the cleanest way for a veteran to avoid becoming legally “unrepresented” is to complete an advance directive, name a health care agent or proxy, and make sure the VA has that information on file. The VA’s regulation specifically states that a VA Advance Directive can be used to designate a health care agent and document treatment preferences.

There is also a broader question on rights that this agreement does not erase; whether courts and petitioners will consistently pursue less restrictive alternatives before full guardianship. That concern is central to the disability-rights criticism already forming around the policy, and it is likely to become one of the most important questions as cases start moving through state systems that can already vary widely in process and oversight.

The Real Tensions at the Center of the Agreement

The Veteran in that hospital bed is not hypothetical. The VA itself estimates 700 unbefriended Veterans will be left without another option. Neither is the risk that comes with letting the government ask a court to take part of someone’s autonomy away.

Both things are true at the same time. Some Veterans really do have no one left to speak for them. Some really are stuck in a system that cannot move them safely without a legal decision-maker. And now VA has a clearer path to ask a court to step in.

This agreement doesn’t resolve the issue itself, It just forces the system to stop pretending it is someone else’s problem.

Suggested reads:

• VA Opens $112M in Suicide Prevention Grants, but Outreach Gaps Remain
• VA's Review of Over 1 Million Disability Claims Sparks Concern. What Veterans Need to Know
• More Than 1 Million Veterans May Qualify for Additional GI Bill Benefits After Supreme Court Ruling