Most California parents are able to name a guardian on a piece of paper. Far fewer realize that the paper does different work depending on whether it concerns the child’s person or the child’s estate. Two Probate Code sections, one of them amended effective January 1, 2025, and another amended effective January 1, 2026, set those limits.

Probate Code section 1500 allows a parent to nominate a guardian of the person, the estate, or both, only in two situations. The other parent must nominate, or consent in writing to the nomination of, the same guardian for the same child. Or, at the time the petition is filed, the other parent must be dead, lack legal capacity to consent, or be a parent whose consent would not be required for an adoption of the child. The nomination is also subject to section 1502.

How the nomination is made, and when it takes effect

Probate Code section 1502, as amended by Assembly Bill 495 effective January 1, 2026, allows the nomination to appear in the petition, at the hearing, or in a writing signed before or after the petition is filed. Section 1502(b) lets that writing make the nomination effective only on stated conditions, including the later absence, legal incapacity, or death of the person making the nomination. Unless the writing says otherwise, 1502(c) keeps the nomination effective even after that later absence, incapacity, or death.

Parents sometimes work with HLG or another lawyer who handles California guardianship papers when they want the writing to name a backup, to delay effectiveness until incapacity, and to state clearly whether it covers the person, the estate, or both, because those drafting choices are not filled in by the statute. Section 1502(a) also tells the court to give due weight to a nomination of a guardian of the person pursuant to Family Code section 3043. That is a direction to consider the nomination. It is not a command to appoint the nominee as the child’s custodian.

Estate first, person second

The appointment power sits in Probate Code section 1514, amended by Assembly Bill 2224 effective January 1, 2025. Section 1514(a) allows the court, after a hearing, to appoint a guardian of the person or the estate, or both, if it appears necessary or convenient. For a guardianship of the person, 1514(b)(1) provides that the court is governed by Family Code sections beginning at 3020 and 3040, the statutes that already govern custody of a minor. A parent is generally not appointed as guardian of the child’s person, except as provided in section 1510.1 or 2105.

The estate rule is stricter in the nominee’s favor. Under 1514(c), the court shall appoint a guardian nominated under section 1500 insofar as the nomination relates to the guardianship of the estate, unless the court determines that the nominee is unsuitable. A relative’s immigration status alone does not constitute unsuitability. For property covered by a nomination under section 1501, 1514(d) uses the same “shall appoint unless unsuitable” standard.

Does a nomination decide where the child lives?

The difference matters in a concrete way. A carefully written nomination is likely to control who manages a child’s money and property, unless the nominee is unsuitable. It does not, by itself, decide who the child will live with. That second question still runs through the custody statutes cited in 1514(b)(1), and through the “due weight” language in 1502(a).

A nomination that never gets signed, or that names only one person with no alternate, leaves the court without the estate-appointment command in 1514(c) when it is needed most. The 2025 and 2026 amendments did not change that basic gap. They only sharpened the rules for how a signed nomination is made and how much force it has over the estate. The host’s practical checklist for wills, health directives, and long-term care decisions makes the same point: a will is a usual place to nominate a guardian, but the court still considers the child’s best interests.