Which of the following is NOT a valid reason for appointing a guardian?

A guardian is typically appointed to protect an individual, known as the ward, who is unable to make informed decisions or care for themselves due to various circumstances, such as mental incapacity, age, or health issues. Therefore, the inability to make informed decisions, the inability to care for oneself, and risks of exploitation are all legitimate and valid reasons to petition for a guardian.

The ward's preference for independence, on the other hand, is not a valid reason for appointing a guardian. Guardianship should not be imposed simply because someone prefers to maintain their independence. In fact, the legal principle underlying guardianship is to uphold the rights and dignity of individuals. The system prioritizes self-determination, and if a person is capable of making their own decisions and expressing a desire for independence, they should be allowed to do so. This respects their autonomy and prevents unnecessary intrusion into their personal life. Thus, the correct answer highlights a fundamental principle in guardianship: the importance of preserving individual independence whenever possible.