Literature DB >> 31984100

The marriage of psychology and law: testamentary capacity.

Simon Zuscak1,2,3, Ian Coyle4,5,6, Patrick Keyzer7, M Anthony Machin8.   

Abstract

Banks v. Goodfellow [1870. LR 5 QB 549 (Eng.)] is almost 150 years old, yet still stands as authority for the principle that unsoundness of the mind will not rebut testamentary capacity where it does not affect the will itself. Readers of this journal would know that psychology has advanced greatly during this sesquicentenary, and yet the law relating to testamentary capacity has remained relatively stagnant. We review the present laws relating to decision-making for adults with impaired capacity, particularly in Queensland, and also review various models of gauging decision-making capacity in other jurisdictions. We argue that qualified experts should be enlisted to make determinations about testamentary capacity when questions of capacity arise. We also argue the case for the development of scientifically validated protocols to assess decision-making capacity in the testamentary context.
© 2019 The Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law.

Keywords:  assessment protocol; cognitive testing; dementia; expert evidence; regulated decision-making; testamentary capacity

Year:  2019        PMID: 31984100      PMCID: PMC6762100          DOI: 10.1080/13218719.2018.1557506

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychiatr Psychol Law        ISSN: 1321-8719


  61 in total

Review 1.  Neuropsychological assessment of mental capacity.

Authors:  Karen Sullivan
Journal:  Neuropsychol Rev       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 7.444

2.  Clinical prediction of falls in the elderly.

Authors:  Robert Ruchinskas
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.159

3.  Assessment of testamentary capacity and vulnerability to undue influence.

Authors:  Kenneth I Shulman; Carole A Cohen; Felice C Kirsh; Ian M Hull; Pamela R Champine
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 18.112

4.  Variable judgments of decisional capacity in cognitively impaired research subjects.

Authors:  Carol B Stocking; Gavin W Hougham; Deborah D Danner; Marion B Patterson; Peter J Whitehouse; Greg A Sachs
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 5.562

5.  Assessing decision-making capacity: lessons from the Court of Protection.

Authors:  Richard Griffith; Cassam Tengnah
Journal:  Br J Community Nurs       Date:  2013-05

6.  A short portable mental status questionnaire for the assessment of organic brain deficit in elderly patients.

Authors:  E Pfeiffer
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  1975-10       Impact factor: 5.562

7.  Decision-making capacity of elderly patients assessed through the vignette method: imagination or reality?

Authors:  A Vellinga; J H Smit; E Van Leeuwen; W Van Tilburg; C Jonker
Journal:  Aging Ment Health       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.658

8.  Consistency of physicians' legal standard and personal judgments of competency in patients with Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  D C Marson; K S Earnst; F Jamil; A Bartolucci; L E Harrell
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 5.562

9.  Psychiatric issues in retrospective challenges of testamentary capacity.

Authors:  Kenneth I Shulman; Carole A Cohen; Ian Hull
Journal:  Int J Geriatr Psychiatry       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.485

10.  Toward a neurologic model of competency: Cognitive predictors of capacity to consent in Alzheimer's disease using three different legal standards.

Authors:  D C Marson; A Chatterjee; K K Ingram; L E Harrell
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 9.910

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.