Right to counsel - consent to treatment plan
While a state may have many statutes, court decisions, or court rules governing appointment of counsel for a particular subject area, a "Key Development" is a statute/decision/rule that prevails over the others (example: a state high court decision finding a categorical right to counsel in guardianships cases takes precedence over a statute saying appointment in guardianship cases is discretionary).
Legislation, Involuntary Medical Treatment
"No guardian, temporary guardian, or special guardian of a minor or incapacitated person may consent to treatment for which substituted judgment determination may be required." M.G.L. ch. 190B, § 5-306A(a). However, a court may hold a hearing to determine whether to authorize a treatment plan based on the "substituted judgment" of the court. To authorize treatment, the court must find that the person, if not incapacitated, would consent to the treatment and must approve, authorize, and endorse the treatment plan. In such hearings, indigent minors or indigent incapacitated persons have the mandatory right to court-appointed counsel in any hearing in which the court shall consider a treatment plan.
If "yes", the established right to counsel or discretionary appointment of counsel is limited in some way, including any of: the only authority is a lower/intermediate court decision or a city council, not a high court or state legislature; there has been a subsequent case that has cast doubt; a statute is ambiguous; or the right or discretionary appointment is not for all types of individuals or proceedings within that category.
Appointment of Counsel: categorical Qualified: no