Mental capacity assessment in the multi-professional real world: a qualitative study of six areas of uncertainty.

ABSTRACT

Background: The Mental Capacity Act 2005 of England and Wales is a ground-breaking piece of legislation with reach into healthcare, social care and legal settings. Professionals have needed to develop skills to assess mental capacity and handle malign influence, but it is unclear how assessments are implemented in real world settings. Our previously reported survey found professionals juggling competing resources in complex systems, often struggling to stay up to date with law.The current follow-up study uses one-to-one interviews of professionals to characterise in detail six areas of uncertainty faced when assessing mental capacity, whilst suggesting ways to make improvements. Methods: Forty-four healthcare, social care and legal professionals were interviewed, using a semi-structured topic guide. Transcripts were analysed using framework analysis: a qualitative technique built to investigate healthcare policy. Results: Our topic guide generated 21 themes. In relation to the six areas of uncertainty 1) Many participants stressed the importance of capturing a holistic view, adding that their own profession was best-placed for this - although a medical diagnosis was often needed. 2) The presumption of capacity was a laudable aim, though not always easy to operationalise and occasionally being open to abuse. 3) There was cautious interest in psychometric testing, providing a cognitive context for decisions. 4) Undue influence was infrequent, but remained under-emphasised in training. 5) Multi-professional assessments were common, despite doubts about fitting these within local resources and the law. 6) Remote assessment was generally acceptable, if inadequate for identifying coercion. Conclusions: Practical constraints and competing demands were reported by professionals working within real world systems. Assessment processes must be versatile, equally applicable in routine and emergency settings, across diverse decisional types, for both generalist and specialist assessors, and able to handle coercion. Recognising these challenges will guide development of best practices in assessment and associated policy.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 of England and Wales is an important piece of law for professionals working in health and social care or as lawyers. It explains how to assess whether a person is able to take a particular decision for themselves ­ and therefore has "mental capacity" in the eyes of society. Professionals have needed to develop skills to assess mental capacity, and to recognise situations where family or friends are trying to influence decisions for their own interests. We previously reported a large scale survey of professionals who assess mental capacity. The current study uses one-to-one interviews, exploring in detail six areas of uncertainty around capacity assessment which were described in that survey. We interviewed 44 health and social care professionals and lawyers, then analysed their responses. We found 21 themes relating to the six areas of uncertainty 1) The importance of capturing a holistic view of the person's life; 2) Challenges for assessors when trying to presume initially that a person does have mental capacity, as the law asks assessors to do; 3) Detailed testing by psychologists could be useful; 4) Other people were rarely thought to try to influence decisions, but awareness of this possibility should be emphasised in training; 5) Multi-professional assessments were common, despite doubts about whether these were possible in all settings or fit with the law; 6) Remote assessment was generally acceptable, but was poor at identifying if people were being influenced. Practical constraints and competing demands were reported by professionals working within real world systems. Our analysis suggests that mental capacity assessment processes need to be versatile, so they can work well in routine and emergency settings and for a range of types of decisions. Recognising these challenges will guide development of best practices in assessment and associated policy.