Abstract
This article gives a brief introduction to the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Treatment (MacCAT-T) and critically examines its theoretical presuppositions. On the basis of empirical, methodological and ethical critique it is emphasised that the cognitive bias that underlies the MacCAT-T assessment needs to be modified. On the one hand it has to be admitted that the operationalisation of competence in terms of value-free categories, e.g. rational decision abilities, guarantees objectivity to a great extent; but on the other hand it bears severe problems. Firstly, the cognitive focus is in itself a normative convention in the process of anthropological value-attribution. Secondly, it misses the complexity of the decision process in real life. It is therefore suggested that values, emotions and other biographic and context specific aspects should be considered when interpreting the cognitive standards according to the MacArthur model. To fill the gap between cognitive and non-cognitive approaches the phenomenological theory of personal constructs is briefly introduced. In conclusion some main demands for further research to develop a multi-step model of competence assessment are outlined.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Appelbaum, P.S. (1998) Ought we to Require Emotional Capacity as Part of Decisional Competence? Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal8, 377–387.
Bauer, A., and Vollmann, J. (2002) Einwilligungsfähigkeit bei Psychisch Kranken. Eine Ñbersicht Empirischer Untersuchungen. Nervenarzt 73, 1031–1038.
Bell, R.C. (1990) Analytic Issues in the Use of Repertory Grid Technique. In G.J. Neimeyer and R.A. Neimeyer (Eds.), Advances in Personal Construct Psychology. Greenwich: JAI Press.
Buchanan, A.E. and Brock, D.W. (1989) Deciding for Others: The Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Charland, L.C. (1998) Appreciation and Emotion: Theoretical Reflections on the MacArthur Treatment Competence Study. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal8, 359–376.
Dekkers, W.J.M. (1998) Hermeneutics and Experiences of the Body. The Case of Low Back Pain. Theoretical Medicine 19, 277–293.
Drane, J.F. (1985) The Many Faces of Competency. Hastings Center Report 15(2), 17–21.
Elliot, C. (1997) Caring About Risks: Are Severely Depressed Patients Competent to Consent to Research? Archives of General Psychiatry 54, 113–116.
Fitten, L.J., Lusky, R., and Hamann, C. (1990) Assessing Treatment Decision-making Capacity in Elderly. Archives of Internal Medicine 150, 1717–1721.
Freedman, B. (1981) Competence, Marginal and Otherwise: Concepts and Ethics. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry4,53–72.
Grisso, T., and Appelbaum, P.S. (1995) Comparison of Standards for Assessing Patients' Capacities to Make Treatment Decisions. American Journal of Psychiatry 152, 1033–1037.
Grisso, T., and Appelbaum, P.S. (1998) Assessing Competence to Consent to Treatment. A Guide for Physicians and other Health Professionals. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Helmchen, H., Kanowski, S., and Koch, H.G. (1989) Forschung mit dementen Kranken: Forschungsbedarf und Einwilligungsproblematik. Ethik in der Medizin1,83–98.
Janofsky, J., McCarthy, R., and Folstein, M. (1992) The Hopkins Competency Assessment Test: ABrief Method for Evaluating Patients' Capacity to Give Informed Consent. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 43, 132–136.
Kelly, G.A. (1955) The Psychology of Personal Constructs. New York: Norton.
Kelly, G.A. (1970) ABrief Introduction to Personal Construct Theory. In D. Bannister (Ed.) Perspectives in Personal Construct Theory(pp. 1–30). London, New York: Academic Press.
Markson, L.J., Kern, D., Annas, G., and Glantz, L. (1994) Physician Assessment of Patient Competence. Journal of American Geriatrics Society 42, 1074–1080.
Riemann, R. (1991) Repertory Grid Technik.Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Roth, L.H., Meisel, A., and Lidz, C.W. (1977) Tests of Competency to Consent to Treatment. American Journal of Psychiatry 134, 279–284.
Rutman, D., and Silberfeld, M. (1997) A Preliminary Report on the Discrepancy between Clinical and Test Evaluation of Competence. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 37, 634–639.
Scheer, J.W., and Catina, A. (Eds.) (1993) Einführung in die Repertory Grid-Technik. Bern: Huber.
Vollmann, J. (2000) Einwilligungsfähigkeit als relationales Modell. Klinische Praxis und medizinethis-che Analyse. Nervenarzt 71, 709–714.
Vollmann, J., Bauer, A., Danker-Hopfe, D., and Helmchen, H. (2003) Competence of Mentally Ill Patients: A Comparative Empirical Study. Psychological Medicine 33, 1463–1471.
Vollmann, J., Kühl, K.-P., Tilmann, A., Hartung, H.D., and Helmchen, H. (2004) Einwilligungsfähigkeit und Neuropsychologische Einschränkungen bei Dementen Patienten. Nervenarzt 75,29–35.
Welie, S.P.K. (2001) Criteria for Patient Decision Making (In)competence: A Review of and Commen-tary on Some Empirical Approaches. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy4, 139–151.
Welie, J.V.M., and Welie, S.P.K. (2001) Patient Decision Making Competence: Outlines of a Conceptual Analysis. Medicine, Healthcare and Philosophy4, 127–138.
Widdershoven, G.A.M. (1995) Principe of Praktijk? Een Hermeneutische Visie op Gezondheid en Zog. Maastricht: Rijksuniversiteit Limburg.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Breden, T.M., Vollmann, J. The Cognitive Based Approach of Capacity Assessment in Psychiatry: A Philosophical Critique of the MacCAT-T. Health Care Analysis 12, 273–283 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-004-6635-x
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-004-6635-x