Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T22:18:45.461Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 11 - Decision-Making Capacity

from Section 2 - Consultation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2022

By
Arthur R. Derse
Edited by
D. Micah Hester  and
Toby L. Schonfeld
D. Micah Hester
Affiliation:
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, College of Medicine
Toby L. Schonfeld
Affiliation:
National Center for Ethics in Health Care, US Department of Veterans Affairs
Get access

Summary

Decision-making capacity is the ability to make autonomous and reasoned decisions about medical care. The presence of this ability to make decisions about medical care is crucial to recognizing autonomy. Recognizing autonomy supports the ethical right of individuals to make decisions about their medical care. Although informed consent is essential to the exercise of autonomous decision- making, informed consent rests not only upon the information needed to make a decision, but also upon the capacity of the individual to make a medical decision. Thus, individuals must possess decision-making capacity in order to exercise their right to make autonomous decisions about their medical care.

Type
Chapter
Information
Guidance for Healthcare Ethics Committees , pp. 95 - 103
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Bar Association Commission on Law and Aging. (2021, April 20). Capacity Assessment. www.americanbar.org/groups/law_aging/resources/capacity_assessmentGoogle Scholar
Appelbaum, PS (2007). Assessment of patients’ competence to consent to treatment. New England Journal of Medicine, 357(18): 1834–1840.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brock, DW, Wartman, SA (1990). When competent patients make irrational choices. New England Journal of Medicine, 322(22): 1595–1599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buchanan, AE, Brock, DW (1989). Deciding for Others: The Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cruzan v. Director of Missouri Department of Health. (1990), 497 US 261, 110 S.Ct. 2841, 111 L.Ed. 2d. 224.Google Scholar
Derse, AR, Schiedermayer, DL (2015). Practical Ethics for Students, Interns & Residents, 4th ed. Hagerstown, MD: University Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Ganzini, L, Volicer, L, Nelson, W, Derse, AR. (2003). Pitfalls in assessment of decision-making capacity. Psychosomatics, 44(3): 237–243.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ganzini, L, Volicer, L, Nelson, WA, Fox, E, Derse, AR (2005). Ten myths about decision-making capacity. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 6(3 Suppl.): S100–S104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Folstein, MF, Folstein, SE, McHugh, PR (1975). “Mini-mental state.” A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12(3): 189–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joint Centre for Bioethics. (n.d.). Aid to Capacity Evaluation (ACE). http://128.100.72.105/tools/documents/ace.pdfGoogle Scholar
Nasreddine, ZS, Phillips, NA, Bédirian, V, et al. (2005). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53(4): 695–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1992). Making Health Care Decisions, Vol. 1. https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/559354Google Scholar
Roth, LH, Meisel, A, Lidz, CW (1977). Tests of competency to consent to treatment. American Journal of Psychiatry, 134(3): 279–284.Google ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×