Cargando…

Undisclosed probing into decision-making capacity: a dilemma in secondary care

BACKGROUND: The assessment of patients’ decision-making capacity is ubiquitous in contemporary healthcare. This paper examines the ethics of undisclosed probing of capacity by psychiatrists. The discussion will refer to the law in England and Wales, though the highlighted issues are likely to be rel...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Talukdar, Sandip
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8305499/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34301259
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00669-5
_version_ 1783727589140987904
author Talukdar, Sandip
author_facet Talukdar, Sandip
author_sort Talukdar, Sandip
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The assessment of patients’ decision-making capacity is ubiquitous in contemporary healthcare. This paper examines the ethics of undisclosed probing of capacity by psychiatrists. The discussion will refer to the law in England and Wales, though the highlighted issues are likely to be relevant in similar jurisdictions. MAIN TEXT: Decision-making capacity is a private attribute, and patients may not necessarily be aware that one of their personal abilities is being explored. Routine exploration of capacity has not historically been a part of psychiatric examination, but it is now difficult to avoid during psychiatric interview.Ethical practice and shared decision-making require patients to be aware that their decision-making may be evaluated by the doctor at some point, and the potential implications of an objective professional conclusion of incapacity. Case law directs that patients should be informed about any assessment of their decision-making ability, though the extent to which this has translated into practice is unclear. However, explanation about the assessment may cause a patient to react negatively, which may impede therapeutic engagement and constitute an ethical dilemma. It is argued that in the absence of systemic measures, professionals should retain the discretion to decide whether a particular patient should be informed about the impending probe into their decision-making ability, or not. In the latter instance, concealment of information about the assessment or its purpose should be subject to the caveats and safeguards associated with any recourse to therapeutic exception. CONCLUSION: The necessity to mandatorily inform patients about assessment of their capacity introduces a novel ethical dilemma for psychiatrists. The negotiation of this dilemma should not be the prerogative of the clinician, and requires systemic initiatives to ensure universal awareness of patients about the possibility of their capacity being assessed during their journeys through healthcare systems.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8305499
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83054992021-07-28 Undisclosed probing into decision-making capacity: a dilemma in secondary care Talukdar, Sandip BMC Med Ethics Debate BACKGROUND: The assessment of patients’ decision-making capacity is ubiquitous in contemporary healthcare. This paper examines the ethics of undisclosed probing of capacity by psychiatrists. The discussion will refer to the law in England and Wales, though the highlighted issues are likely to be relevant in similar jurisdictions. MAIN TEXT: Decision-making capacity is a private attribute, and patients may not necessarily be aware that one of their personal abilities is being explored. Routine exploration of capacity has not historically been a part of psychiatric examination, but it is now difficult to avoid during psychiatric interview.Ethical practice and shared decision-making require patients to be aware that their decision-making may be evaluated by the doctor at some point, and the potential implications of an objective professional conclusion of incapacity. Case law directs that patients should be informed about any assessment of their decision-making ability, though the extent to which this has translated into practice is unclear. However, explanation about the assessment may cause a patient to react negatively, which may impede therapeutic engagement and constitute an ethical dilemma. It is argued that in the absence of systemic measures, professionals should retain the discretion to decide whether a particular patient should be informed about the impending probe into their decision-making ability, or not. In the latter instance, concealment of information about the assessment or its purpose should be subject to the caveats and safeguards associated with any recourse to therapeutic exception. CONCLUSION: The necessity to mandatorily inform patients about assessment of their capacity introduces a novel ethical dilemma for psychiatrists. The negotiation of this dilemma should not be the prerogative of the clinician, and requires systemic initiatives to ensure universal awareness of patients about the possibility of their capacity being assessed during their journeys through healthcare systems. BioMed Central 2021-07-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8305499/ /pubmed/34301259 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00669-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Debate
Talukdar, Sandip
Undisclosed probing into decision-making capacity: a dilemma in secondary care
title Undisclosed probing into decision-making capacity: a dilemma in secondary care
title_full Undisclosed probing into decision-making capacity: a dilemma in secondary care
title_fullStr Undisclosed probing into decision-making capacity: a dilemma in secondary care
title_full_unstemmed Undisclosed probing into decision-making capacity: a dilemma in secondary care
title_short Undisclosed probing into decision-making capacity: a dilemma in secondary care
title_sort undisclosed probing into decision-making capacity: a dilemma in secondary care
topic Debate
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8305499/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34301259
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00669-5
work_keys_str_mv AT talukdarsandip undisclosedprobingintodecisionmakingcapacityadilemmainsecondarycare