Any form of decision-making is only as good as the criteria used for making the decisions. There are individuals decisions that people make on whether to drink and drive. There are family decisions made on how to educate children. But, even on that family level, other groups of people self-proclaim themselves as a wiser authority in an attempt to govern others.

When I was working for the State of Michigan in a Mental Institution, there were many 'ist' people making decisions.

There were psychologists, psychiatrists, and therapists ...all contributing in making decisions on a 9 to 5 basis. I worked the afternoon shift, after the 'ist's had all left for home.  And we encountered unique problems that we had to deal with.  It was evident that on-the-spot decisions had to be made.

I attended a meeting, and I tried to convince the 'ist's that we needed to be trusted more in making decsions ...that we were the direct care workers who were there all the time and observed most of the behavior.  I mentioned that our observations and descriptions of the behavior were critical for their behavioral studies or well as medical interventions.

They agreed, and as soon as we were given the latitude to make those choices ...I saw the sorry results.  Some of my co-workers took advantage of that trust, and as i thought we could improve the situation, it got worse.

So, the question seems always to remain ..."Who is most capable and trustworthy to make decisions?"  And who is to decide who it is who should decide??

As was the case at my workplace, neglect and incompetence is better than abuse ...but, it would be preferred to arrive at a solutions that would not thrive on either.