IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlawss/v4y2015i2p229-244d50788.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conceptual and Ethical Problems in the Mental Capacity Act 2005: An Interrogation of the Assessment Process

Author

Listed:
  • David Gibson

    (School of Law, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
    Centre for Human Development, St Patrick's College, Dublin City University, Drumcondra, Dublin 9, Ireland)

Abstract

Central to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) is the claim that a conferral of incapacity may not be based on the wisdom of a decision alone. This paper problematizes this position. Values-based medicine is drawn on to explore the process of capacity assessment, highlighting the presence of preconceptions throughout assessment. Two cases before the Court of Protection are examined to bring into focus the complexity of conducting assessment without reference to wisdom. The paper proposes that every stage in the assessment of capacity is undertaken with reference to preconceptions and that an acknowledgement of these, along with transparency about when they are to be employed, would allow for greater clarity about what the MCA demands of practitioners.

Suggested Citation

  • David Gibson, 2015. "Conceptual and Ethical Problems in the Mental Capacity Act 2005: An Interrogation of the Assessment Process," Laws, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-16, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:4:y:2015:i:2:p:229-244:d:50788
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/4/2/229/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/4/2/229/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:4:y:2015:i:2:p:229-244:d:50788. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.