Guardianship — Standalone

KRS Chapter 387 prescribes NO execution formality for a standalone inter vivos parental nomination (it is evidence in a later KRS 387.025 proceeding, not a statutory instrument). The template renders a two-witness attestation block AND a notary acknowledgment block as BEST PRACTICE for evidentiary weight, each labeled 'BEST PRACTICE - NOT A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT' with an express statement that KRS Chapter 387 does not prescribe an execution formality. Confirm: (a) both blocks stay; (b) the labeling language; (c) whether execution instructions should recommend doing BOTH (current draft recommends notarization at minimum, witnesses additionally).

KRS 387.032 verbatim enumerates only nominations 'pursuant to KRS 387.040 or 387.050' (nomination by will / nomination by a minor 14+). A standalone inter vivos PARENTAL nomination is NOT one of the two statutorily enumerated nominations. The document therefore frames itself as a written expression of parental wishes the court weighs WITHIN the KRS 387.032 best-interest determination - it does NOT claim to be a statutorily enumerated KRS 387.032 nomination and does NOT claim the statute lists a preference-of-the-parents factor (no such phrase appears in the statute text). INTAKE-SIDE STATUS (corrected 2026-06-09 critic fix): the intake config (apps/cornerstone-next/app/lib/intake-configs/guardianship-standalone.js) formerly fabricated KRS 387.032 content at ~6 sites - engagement letter section 2 (the fabricated 'preference of the parents' quote, ~line 350), the step-3 intro factor list (~line 200), the scrivener 'Matters to be considered' factor list (~line 472), the guardian-relationship help ('directs the court to consider relationship', ~line 232), and weight-overclaims cited to the statute in the step-1 intro (~line 58) and the scrivener 'Standalone guardianship nomination' entry (~line 436), plus the 'factors in KRS 387.032' phrasing in 'Letters of guardianship' (~line 448) - ALL rewritten 2026-06-09 to the honest paraphrase (nomination informs the best-interest determination; practical-weight observations framed 'in practice', unhooked from the cite). RESIDUAL (out of that fix's scope, owed to the glossary cleanup pass): the same fabrication shape persists in intake-implications/guardianship-standalone.js (~line 321) and intake-implications/common-legal-glossary.js (~lines 771-782). Confirm this honest-weight framing, or direct stronger/weaker phrasing.

The co_parent_living recital states: a living parent whose parental rights have not been terminated or suspended by prior court order (KRS 387.010(7)) generally has priority over this nomination, and the nomination is intended to take effect when neither parent is available. 'Generally has priority' is grounded in the KRS 387.010(7) parent definition plus the constitutional parental-rights framework - KRS Chapter 387 contains no express priority clause. Confirm the hedged phrasing ('generally') and the take-effect framing.

The customer's optional special_instructions (intake Step 3 'Special instructions or preferences') render VERBATIM in the REASONS AND WISHES section, framed as non-binding guidance; when blank, ruled blank lines render instead (handwriting space). Confirm the verbatim-render posture and the framing sentence.

The REPEALED guardianship-of-the-estate section (bare cite 387.060; repealed per source pull lines 187-189; flagged in the 2026-05-26 implication audit section 8.1) is the deed-class trap for this SKU. This template NEVER cites the repealed section; estate-guardianship content is grounded in KRS 387.065 (powers/duties incl. receive money for the ward) + KRS 387.125 (asset-management duty), and checkKYGuardianshipStandalone hard-FAILS if the repealed cite ever appears in rendered output (whitespace-tolerant pattern, 2026-06-09). INTAKE-SIDE STATUS (corrected 2026-06-09 critic fix - the earlier draft of this flag wrongly said the cleanup was still owed): the intake-config 387.060 cleanup SHIPPED 2026-05-26 (87f21cb1f) - zero live 387.060 cites remain in apps/cornerstone-next/app/lib/intake-configs/guardianship-standalone.js. The one residual was a dev comment at the intake page (app/intake/guardianship-standalone/page.jsx line ~12) citing 387.060 as good law - corrected to KRS 387.065 + KRS 387.125 in the 2026-06-09 critic-fix commit. Confirm the substitution authorities.

The sole_parent branch recital reads: 'I am the sole legal parent of the minor children named in this declaration. No other living person holds parental rights to my children that have not been terminated or suspended by prior court order.' This is the customer's own representation captured at intake - the firm does not verify parentage. Confirm the recital wording (it mirrors the KRS 387.010(7) definition) and whether a softening clause ('to the best of my knowledge') should be added.