Assessments of mental capacity: upholding the rights of the vulnerable or the misleading comfort of pseudo objectivity?

The Journal of Adult Protection, Ahead of Print. Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present findings from a research project which investigated the approaches of different groups of assessors to the mental capacity assessments which are required to be conducted as part of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS). Design/methodology/approach Four case study vignettes were given to participants. Three groups involved in the DOLS assessment process were interviewed by telephone about the factors that may influence their capacity assessments. Findings Most assessors did not refer to the required two-stage test of capacity or the “causative nexus” which requires that assessors must make clear that it is the identified “diagnostic” element which is leading to the inability to meet the “functional” requirements of the capacity test. The normative element of capacity assessments is acknowledged by a number of assess ors who suggest that judging a person’s ability to “weigh” information, in particular, is a subjective and value-based exercise, which is given pseudo objectivity by the language of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). A number of elements of good practice were also identified. Research limitation s/implications In this exploratory study, participant numbers were small (n=21), and the authors relied on self-report rather than actual observations of practice or audit of completed assessments. Practical implications The findings are of relevance to all...
Source: The Journal of Adult Protection - Category: International Medicine & Public Health Source Type: research