Background: Shared decision making is a collaborative process, built on the notion of co-construction and person centered care, that involves both client and clinicians in making health-related decisions through the incorporation of research evidence, clinician expertise, and preferences of the client themselves, in this case, persons with aphasia (Hargraves et al., 2021; Hoffmann et al., 2022).   Rationale: Research exploring the involvement of persons with aphasia in decision-making remains scattered across the knowledge base. As such, they synthesis of current research surrounding the involvement of adults with aphasia in decision-making was crucial - given the vulnerability of the population in involvement. Methodology: A scoping review guided by Arksey and O’Malley’s six steps was used. Following comprehensive searches, screening by two reviewers, and the use of PRISMA-ScR, N=15 records remained for data extraction. Data was then extracted and mapped. To conclude, the results were socially validated by persons with aphasia themselves and speech-language therapists. Results: The involvement of persons with aphasia in decision making is imperative to provide meaningful and person-centred care. Healthcare, however, still tends to follow pathways that centre clinicians as decision-makers - leaving a notable absence in the incorporation of persons with aphasia. While the presence of aphasia may affect the individual’s capacity to make decisions or their ability to reveal their capacity to make decisions, it is important to recognise that persons with aphasia can make informed decisions and participate in shared decision making if provided with appropriate strategies and supports. Conclusion: By prioritising the involvement of persons with aphasia in their own intervention processes, their inclusion as both a human right and an essential function of being human is acknowledged and the erroneous assumption that no persons with aphasia can make decisions for themselves and are thus unable to participate in shared decision making processes can be refuted.