Competence to Make Treatment Decisions: A Forensic Psychology Overview

Competence to Make Treatment Decisions

Background and Definition

  • Definition: Competence to make treatment decisions is an extension of self-determination, encompassing an individual's right to control their own body, including the right to accept or refuse medical treatment.

  • Expectation: When an individual freely accepts or refuses treatment, they are generally presumed competent and therefore accountable for their choices.

  • Incompetence: Situations arise where an individual is deemed incompetent, necessitating an evaluation of their capacity.

    • Clinical Example: A 43-year-old patient refused medical treatment for glaucoma in his eyes, citing voices telling him not to. This was presented as an example of a patient deemed incompetent.

Informed Consent

  • Core Concept: Informed consent is the patient's permission for treatment, granted only after they have received all necessary medical information pertinent to their situation.

  • Necessity: It is vital to ensure patients can make well-informed choices regarding their care.

  • Three Requirements/Goals of Informed Consent: These principles aim to:

    • Promote individual autonomy: Respecting the patient's right to choose for themselves.

    • Encourage rational decision-making: Providing sufficient information for a reasoned choice.

    • Protect the safety and welfare of patients or research subjects: Ensuring awareness of potential risks and benefits.

  • Three Elements for Valid Informed Consent: For consent to be considered valid, it must include:

    1. Appropriate disclosure.

    2. A competent patient.

    3. Voluntary consent.

Disclosure

  • Requirement: Disclosure is one of the three essential elements for valid informed consent.

  • Historical Views on Adequate Disclosure:

    • Pre-1972 View: Disclosure was judged based on what a reasonable clinician would typically disclose under similar circumstances. This view remained largely unchallenged until 1972.

    • Post-1972 View: Adequacy of disclosure began to be evaluated from the patient's perspective, focusing on what information would effectively enable the patient to make a justifiable decision.

  • Consistent Elements of Disclosure: Regardless of which disclosure rule is applied, the fundamental information to be disclosed remains consistent:

    • The nature of the recommended treatment procedure.

    • Its associated risks and benefits.

    • Available alternatives to the recommended treatment.

  • Four Recognized Exceptions to Informed Consent: All legal jurisdictions recognize these exceptions:

    1. Emergency Situations: Disclosure is not required in emergencies, though what constitutes an