Capacity, Consent, and Mental Health Legislation: Time for a New Standard?

By O'Brien, Anthony J. | Contemporary Nurse : a Journal for the Australian Nursing Profession, February/March 2010 | Go to article overview

Capacity, Consent, and Mental Health Legislation: Time for a New Standard?


O'Brien, Anthony J., Contemporary Nurse : a Journal for the Australian Nursing Profession


ABSTRACT

Recent international reforms in mental health legislation have introduced a capacity test as a criterion for civil commitment. There are proposals that a common test of incapacity should apply in both mental and physical health under a single legislative framework for all cases in which the normally accepted standard of informed consent for treatment is not met. Capacity is a complex concept, but can be reliably assessed in clinical practice. Nurses need to be involved in the policy debate about capacity and consent in mental health care.

Keywords: capacity; competence; consent; mental health legislation; assessment; mental health nursing

INTRODUCTION

The 2007 Report of the New Zealand Director of Mental Health (Ministry of Health, 2008) signalled, in its concluding section, the intention of the Ministry to revise current mental health legislation, taking into account considerations of consent and capacity. Such a change is in line with calls from nurses and others for an end to legislation specific to mental health (Campbell, 1994; Dawson & Szmukler, 2006; Rosenman, 1994; Wand & Chiarella, 2006). The focus on capacity in mental health also comes at a time when changes to guardianship legislation allow nurses to carry out formal assessments of capacity. In this paper, I discuss these issues from a New Zealand perspective, but invite international readers to consider implications for their own jurisdictions. I outline issues arising from the 'dangerousness standard' of current mental health legislation, and its effects in contributing to stigma and discrimination. I then explore the concept of capacity, and its assessment in mental health and other clinical populations. Capacity-based mental health legislation would present particular issues for people on community treatment orders and I discuss these issues before considering international moves towards a capacity standard. Finally, I explore some of the implications of such a standard for mental health nursing. Any revision of mental health legislation needs to be mindful that it is primarily a social innovation, and will not easily yield to medical or legal tinkering. Mental health nurses will be impacted by any changes towards a capacity-based standard, and need to be involved in this debate. In this paper I have followed the example of Appelbaum (2007) in using terms 'capacity' and 'competence' interchangeably to refer to either legal or decision-making capacity.

CURRENT MENTAL HEALTH LEGISLATION

Mental health law is a taken for granted aspect of most western countries' legal systems, to the point where little thought is given to its necessity. Rosenman (1994, p. 560) argued that 'Mental health laws which allow for the compulsory detention and treatment of patients with mental illness have been so long part of the psychiatric landscape that we do not question their existence or necessity'. In western countries, the current form of mental health legislation developed in the early 19th century, and so is a relatively modern response to emerging problems with the social order (Castel, 1988). Despite changes over the past 200 years the fundamental features of mental health legislation remain the same: imposed medical authority supported by a legal framework which gives priority to medical expertise. In the 1980s and 1990s, in line with international trends, mental health legislation in Australia and New Zealand was revised away from the existing 'need for treatment' standard towards the current dangerousness standard. Internationally, there was concern that the medically determined need for treatment standard resulted in high numbers of involuntary admissions (Hiday, 2003). The intention of the dangerousness standard was that legislation should be invoked only in cases of serious danger to self or others, thus limiting the numbers of people subject to compulsion, especially because at that time committal was synonymous with admission to hospital. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Capacity, Consent, and Mental Health Legislation: Time for a New Standard?
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.