Pacemaker PTSD? Pacemaker PTSD?

Pacemaker PTSD?

This is primarily a case for cardiologists, cardiac nurses and anaesthetists with a learning point for psychiatric experts. Viewed from outside the...
Advising as to the applicable law Advising as to the applicable law

Advising as to the applicable law

The detail of this judgment is for experts who conduct capacity assessments. Two points arise of more general interest. First, the expert, who had...
Evidentiary reliability and the meaning of words Evidentiary reliability and the meaning of words

Evidentiary reliability and the meaning of words

This case has a number of important features of general interest. It illustrates the importance of assessing the reliability of a subject’s...
Podcast Episode 11: AI and the Expert Witness Podcast Episode 11: AI and the Expert Witness

Podcast Episode 11: AI and the Expert Witness

In the 11th episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we take a look at how AI is being used by Expert Witnesses. We discuss general developments related...
EWI publishes new Guidance on Expert Discussions and Joint Statements EWI publishes new Guidance on Expert Discussions and Joint Statements

EWI publishes new Guidance on Expert Discussions and Joint Statements

We have just refreshed our guidance on ‘Expert Discussions and Joint Statements' in the EWI Knowledge Hub...

Check out our Case Updates and Member Magazine

Looking for more news relevant to the Expert Witness community? Why not check out our database of cases relevant to Expert Evidence or the latest and previous editions of our member magazine, Expert Matters.

News

Clicking on one of the topics below will display news items relevant to that topic. You can also use the search bar below to identify news items.

Can capacity be assessed on papers without a consultation?
Keith Rix 516

Can capacity be assessed on papers without a consultation?

byKeith Rix

 

Commentary

Any uncertainty as to whether a psychiatrist can provide an expert report as a paper-based assessment is answered by this case. In any event, the GMC, in Providing witness statements or expert evidence as part of legal proceedings (https://www.gmc-uk.org/professional-standards/the-professional-standards/providing-witness-statements-or-expert-evidence-as-part-of-legal-proceedings/providing-witness-statements-or-expert-evidence-as-part-of-legal-proceedings#witness-of-fact-specific-responsibilities-5624621CB7C54F7E9D1C1458166314C5 ) recognises that this may happen:

“If you are asked to give an opinion about a person without the opportunity to consult with or examine them, you must explain any limit that this places on your ability to give an opinion. If you decide to proceed, you should be able to justify your decision.”

It is also good practice to include a statement to the effect that you are willing to consult with, and examine, the person and, if necessary, amend your opinion.

In this case the paper-based assessment was sufficient for the court to conclude that, having regard to the Mental Capacity Act 2005, s 48, there were "reasons to believe that the Appellant lacks capacity". However, the fact that the court did not make a finding of a lack of capacity and transferred the case to a Tier 3 (High Court) Judge of the Court of Protection in order to determine the matter of capacity indicates how the court recognises how much more difficult it is to make a finding when the report relies on a paper-based assessment compared to a consultation with the subject of the report.   

Learning points
  • Acknowledge the limitation of a paper based assessment.

  • The two-stage process for the assessment of capacity is now: (1) whether P is unable to make a decision for himself/herself in relation to the matter; (2) if so, whether that  inability is “because of” an impairment of, or a disturbance in the functioning of, the mind or brain.

To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. 

Already a member? Login

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.