BACKGROUND: Function-specific mental capacities are the legal criteria for competence. These are regarded as superior to clinical assessments of mental state and general function. AIMS: To determine whether tests of fitness to plead and capacity to consent are independent of each other and independent of mental state and global function in psychosis. METHOD: The MacCAT-T and MacCAT-FP, PANSS and GAF were administered to 102 compulsorily detained forensic patients with psychosis. Criteria for incompetence were inability to express a preference concerning treatment, and independent rating as unfit to plead. RESULTS: MacCAT-T, MacCAT-FP totals and sub-scales correlated with each other and with PANSS and GAF. Those independently rated unfit to plead or who were incapable of making a treatment choice scored significantly worse on all rating scales. No test had satisfactory sensitivity or specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Legal definitions of mind and of functional capacity offer a basis for structured clinical judgement regarding decision-making capacity. However, function-specific measures of understanding, reasoning and appreciation generate much the same results as measures of mental state and global functioning.
BACKGROUND: Function-specific mental capacities are the legal criteria for competence. These are regarded as superior to clinical assessments of mental state and general function. AIMS: To determine whether tests of fitness to plead and capacity to consent are independent of each other and independent of mental state and global function in psychosis. METHOD: The MacCAT-T and MacCAT-FP, PANSS and GAF were administered to 102 compulsorily detained forensic patients with psychosis. Criteria for incompetence were inability to express a preference concerning treatment, and independent rating as unfit to plead. RESULTS:MacCAT-T, MacCAT-FP totals and sub-scales correlated with each other and with PANSS and GAF. Those independently rated unfit to plead or who were incapable of making a treatment choice scored significantly worse on all rating scales. No test had satisfactory sensitivity or specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Legal definitions of mind and of functional capacity offer a basis for structured clinical judgement regarding decision-making capacity. However, function-specific measures of understanding, reasoning and appreciation generate much the same results as measures of mental state and global functioning.
Authors: Enric Vincens Pons; Luis Salvador-Carulla; Alfredo Calcedo-Barba; Silvia Paz; Thomas Messer; Bruno Paccardi; Scott L Zeller Journal: Health Sci Rep Date: 2020-08-09
Authors: Chiara Buizza; Cosmo Strozza; Giulio Sbravati; Giovanni de Girolamo; Clarissa Ferrari; Laura Iozzino; Ambra Macis; Harry G Kennedy; Valentina Candini Journal: Ann Gen Psychiatry Date: 2022-09-10 Impact factor: 3.301
Authors: Elodie Bertrand; Eelco van Duinkerken; J Landeira-Fernandez; Marcia C N Dourado; Raquel L Santos; Jerson Laks; Daniel C Mograbi Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2017-06-16 Impact factor: 5.750
Authors: Harry G Kennedy; Ronan Mullaney; Paul McKenna; John Thompson; David Timmons; Pauline Gill; Owen P O'Sullivan; Paul Braham; Dearbhla Duffy; Anthony Kearns; Sally Linehan; Damian Mohan; Stephen Monks; Lisa McLoughlin; Paul O'Connell; Conor O'Neill; Brenda Wright; Ken O'Reilly; Mary Davoren Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2020-10-23 Impact factor: 3.630