(Bloomberg Opinion) -- One of the more hopeful developments of an otherwise difficult year is the greater concern for the most vulnerable members of society, often accompanied by the realization that they are treated unfairly or worse by the justice system. And while the attention has so far focused on race and gender, it should also be extended to people with disabilities — or, if the word “disability” seems unsuitable, those who are different, neurologically and otherwise.

Some of the very worst treatment of the vulnerable is hardly being discussed. There is an entire category of American adults being denied almost all of their basic legal rights: to hold a job, choose a residence, determine their health care, enter into contracts and even decide what to do with their own body. These are adults under legal guardianship — a court-imposed process, in Ohio as elsewhere, “by which a person is relieved of the right to make personal life decisions and another is appointed to make those decisions on that person’s behalf.”

Among the adults who have lost such rights, or live under the fear that they will, are those with autism. It is entirely possible that they will end up in guarded and segregated communities, often against their will.

Perhaps you think many of these individuals are unable to care for themselves and therefore their full rights cannot be respected. To whatever extent that may be true, it is not a reason for trampling on human rights. And even if you believe it is, you must concede that the legal system is prone to horrible misjudgments and mistakes.

After recent revelations about institutional racism, it is hard to believe that prejudices do not affect decisions about guardianship. The justice system is already heavily biased in favor of plea bargains, in effect favoring efficiency over constitutional rights. And even when there is no bias, there is the reality of simple error — which are common enough in hospitals, where the stakes are much higher.

Yet the error rate for decisions about guardianship, in contrast with the medical error rate, is unknown. There is also a dearth of information about the overall numbers of autistic Americans under guardianship. In American history, lack of transparency has too often been correlated with unfairness and prejudice.

One study considered 8,713 diagnosed autistic adults in the U.S. Of that cohort, 5,025 were legally dependent, with a court-appointed custodian of some kind. Regardless of whether this is a representative sample, guardianship is by no means a rare practice. Of that group, 43.4% were listed as intellectually disabled, and about two-thirds had at least one psychiatric disorder over the course of their lifetimes (with imperfect scrutiny, the general U.S. rate registers at one half).

These numbers hardly settle the question. But they do raise the possibility that many of these adults may never have needed guardianship status in the first place.

Such a lack of transparency is shocking. Once people have lost their rights, it is not particularly easy to win them back, if only because they do not have control over their own life. How do you prove that you are capable of making your own decisions?

So it is likely that a significant number of Americans are being denied their most basic liberties, and without much public outcry, while many others live under that threat. That in turn limits the influence of these individuals among their families and friends, who have the option of testifying against them.

It is also worth asking whether America has done everything possible to minimize the losses of liberty for those who are genuinely unable to care for themselves. Note it was permissible in some locales until just last year to administer two-second electric shocks to adults held in care institutions for purposes of punishment and behavior control. (To be clear, this is not electroshock therapy, which may be medically useful.)

When it comes to guardianship, is there any reason to be so sure that liberty-protecting institutions are in place? Especially since basic information is so hard to come by? As both a people and a polity, Americans do not always behave best “when no one is watching.”

Have you ever wondered how previous generations tolerated or even encouraged so much racism, prejudice, segregation, incarceration and other abuses of human rights? You don’t need a time machine to find out.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

Tyler Cowen is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He is a professor of economics at George Mason University and writes for the blog Marginal Revolution. His books include "Big Business: A Love Letter to an American Anti-Hero."

©2020 Bloomberg L.P.