Cited by 6Healthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsHealth, Medicine and SocietyEthics and bioethics in healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mental capacity in practice part 2: capacity and the suicidal patient

Open access
Beale, Chloe, Lee-Davey, James, Lee, Tennyson, Ruck Keene, Alex·2024·BJPsych Advances

Abstract

SUMMARY: This article is the second of two looking at assessment of mental capacity in clinical practice. In it, we explore capacity assessments in the context of suicidal thoughts and acts. The laws governing doctors’ responsibility to suicidal patients in England and Wales are poorly understood, with tensions at the interface between the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Dynamics of the clinical encounter (including the countertransference) further exacerbate uncertainty about how clinicians should balance patients’ autonomy with protection of life. We use a case example of a patient presenting with suicidality to describe good practice, based on a balance of legal and clinical principles and up-to-date case law. We discuss the difficulty in applying the MCA in relation to patients who appear to lack a consistent and coherent sense of self and others and consider whether the MCA is fit for purpose in determining whether someone with a personality disorder diagnosis should be permitted to end their own life.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1192/bja.2022.82

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. Casey, 2016, Assisted dying: is the Mental Capacity Act 2005 an appropriate framework for decision-making?, Contemporary Issues in Law, 14, 48
  2. 10.1371/journal.pone.0154449 · DOI
  3. Chartonos, 2017, Personality disorder: still the patients psychiatrists dislike?, Psychiatric Bulletin, 41, 12
  4. Ruck Keene, 2020, Capacity and suicide, Mental Capacity Law and Policy
  5. Sarkar, 2013, To be or not to be: legal and ethical considerations in suicide prevention, Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 19, 295, 10.1192/apt.bp.112.010595 · DOI
  6. 2021–2022, Assisted Dying Bill [HL Bill 13]
  7. Aves, 2022, “If you are not a patient they like, then you have capacity”: exploring mental health patient and survivor experiences of being told “You have the capacity to end your life”, Psychiatry is Driving Me Mad
  8. 10.1192/pb.25.2.51 · DOI
  9. 10.1177/1356262214557365 · DOI
  10. Beale, 2022, BJPsych Advances
  11. 10.1080/00201740802661502 · DOI
  12. Szawarski, 2013, Classic cases revisited: the suicide of Kerrie Wooltorton, Journal of the Intensive Care Society, 14, 211, 10.1177/175114371301400307 · DOI
  13. Winnicott, 1949, Hate in the countertransference, International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 30, 69
  14. 10.1017/S174455231200050X · DOI
  15. 10.1136/emj.2010.100750 · DOI
  16. 10.1192/bjb.2019.26 · DOI
  17. Kapur, 2010, Advance directives and suicidal behaviour, BMJ, 341, 590, 10.1136/bmj.c4557 · DOI
  18. Hibbins, 2020, Mental capacity and suicide: “he has mental capacity” is not a reason for clinicians to stand back and do nothing, Recovery in the Bin
  19. 10.1017/9781108686976 · DOI
  20. 10.1177/1460408619899596 · DOI
  21. Wessely, S (2018) Modernising the Mental Health Act: Increasing Choice, Reducing Compulsion. Final report of the Independent Review of the Mental Health Act 1983. GOV.UK.
  22. Brown, 2021, Capacity to die, Mental Health Cop
  23. Clements, 2016, Rates of self-harm presenting to general hospitals: a comparison of data from the Multicentre Study of Self-Harm in England and Hospital Episode Statistics, BMJ Open, 6, 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009749 · DOI
  24. 10.1136/bmj.320.7249.1571 · DOI
  25. 10.1001/archpsyc.1974.01760110049005 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Beale, C., Lee-Davey, J., Lee, T., & Ruck Keene, A.
Affiliations
Queen Mary University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Beale, Chloe
Venue
BJPsych Advances
Published
2023-02-28
Volume
30
Issue
1
Pages
11-20
ISSN
  • 2056-4678 (ISSN-L)
  • 2056-4686
OpenAlex
W4322627011
Cited by
6
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 2
FWCI
1.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
BJPsych Advances (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, Medicine and Society
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
mental capacity assessment, suicidality, Mental Capacity Act 2005, Mental Health Act 1983, duty of care, countertransference, patient autonomy, protection of life, personality disorders, assisted dying, clinical ethics, legal uncertainty

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review