Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Life & Times

Viewpoint: Do any of us truly have the capacity to consent?

Ed Schwarz and Stuart Walter
British Journal of General Practice 2017; 67 (665): 558. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp17X693689
Ed Schwarz
Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, Cornwall, UK. E-mail:
Roles: GPST2 Educational Scholar
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: edward.schwarz@nhs.net
Stuart Walter
Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. E-mail:
Roles: Core Medical Trainee 2
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: stuart.walter@nhs.net
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Life was simpler in the old days. A patient would turn up to their doctor seeking to find out what was wrong with them. The doctor, a professional with several years of study and immeasurable experience, would consider the symptoms. The doctor would hopefully examine the patient and, based on all of this, consider a differential diagnosis. ‘This is your diagnosis’, they would confidently say. Then either ‘take these pills’ or ‘have this test’. There was no room for negotiation, no informative or deliberative models of consultation, and no shared decision making. Autonomy was a phrase that would only have been used in relation to cars.

Nowadays, from the novice medical student, to the nascent doctor stalking the wards, to the harangued medical registrar, through to the learned professors, we are told that patients should give informed consent and therefore be involved in shared decision making. In order for consent to be valid, the patient must have the mental capacity to be able to make a decision. They must also make this decision voluntarily and be given sufficient information so that they understand the implications of that decision. At medical school we learn about Gillick competence and discuss a variety of ethical scenarios, always involving a blood transfusion and a Jehovah’s Witness.

However, when it comes down to a patient making a decision, do any of us really have the capacity to make it? The law is clear — a patient who suffers from no mental incapacity has an absolute right to choose whether to consent to medical treatment. This right of choice is extended to decisions others may regard as inappropriate, not sensible, or different from their own.1

Consider the following examples:

A young woman presents for follow-up after some tests were arranged for a breast lump. She may be prepared for some bad news. A woman with some back pain has an X-ray that surprisingly shows a mass. Using all of the consultation skills learnt, the diagnosis of ‘It’s cancer’ must be mentioned. Evidence suggests that very little information given to patients is retained, with up to 80% forgotten immediately,2 and in these examples that figure rapidly diminishes. How then is someone expected to have the capacity to listen, retain, repeat, weigh up, and be appropriately involved in a management plan? Indeed, on a geriatric ward, an older patient with dementia who seems to retain less than 10% of the conversation would likely be deemed as lacking in capacity. Doctors are quick to assume the idea of autonomy in scenarios when patients make a decision they themselves can understand. However, if this is based on a tenth of the information, is this truly an informed decision?

Therefore, when consulting, our focus should perhaps be on assessing ability. We should be assessing whether the patient has the intellectual, emotional, and physical reserves to weigh up and make these decisions alone.

When a car goes wrong, I take it to the mechanic. This similarly applies to needing a haircut, having a dental check-up, and so on. In such situations I do not feel I have the capacity to make an informed judgement so I leave it in the hands of the professionals. If I need surgery, despite being given the information, it would seem impossible to truly weigh up the risks and thus make an informed choice. A statistic of x chance of a complication is not something one can relate to or put into context, nor, in an emotionally charged situation, can one be said to be impartially assessing the decision.

So does this mean I don’t have capacity? Someone fetch the straitjacket, like in the old days.

  • © British Journal of General Practice 2017

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    [1992] 4 All ER 649. Re T (adult: refusal of medical treatment). Court of Appeal, Civil Division. Lord Donaldson of Lymington Mr, Butler-Sloss and Staughton LJJ 22, 23, 24, 30 JULY 1992. http://www.globalhealthrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/EWCA-1992-In-re-T-adult-refusal-of-medical-treatment.pdf (accessed 11 Oct 2017).
  2. 2.↵
    1. Kessels RPC
    (2003) Patients’ memory for medical information. J R Soc Med 96(5):219–222.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 67 (665)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 67, Issue 665
December 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Viewpoint: Do any of us truly have the capacity to consent?
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Viewpoint: Do any of us truly have the capacity to consent?
Ed Schwarz, Stuart Walter
British Journal of General Practice 2017; 67 (665): 558. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp17X693689

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Viewpoint: Do any of us truly have the capacity to consent?
Ed Schwarz, Stuart Walter
British Journal of General Practice 2017; 67 (665): 558. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp17X693689
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • War in Ukraine: the impacts on child health
  • Moral distress and euthanasia: what, if anything, can doctors learn from veterinarians?
  • Yonder: Drunkorexia, dosette boxes, doctor shopping, and slums
Show more Life & Times

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2022 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242