'Evaluation of testamentary capacity: A systematic review'

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature on methods for the standardized and objective assessment of Testamentary Capacity (TC), to identify the best evidence-based and clinically pragmatic method to assess TC. Doubts concerning TC can have far-reaching legal and financial implications.

METHOD

A systematic search of the literature was conducted, using PRISMA guidelines, to identify studies which describe methods or tools for the assessment of TC.

RESULTS

The Testamentary Definition Scale (TDS); the Testamentary Capacity Assessment Tool (TCAT); and the Testamentary Capacity Instrument (TCI) all have good psychometric properties, but TDS only partially assesses TC, and the TCI is designed for research rather than day-to-day clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

The TCAT could usefully supplement the clinical assessment of TC, coupled with a standardized examination of cognition. There is room to develop an all-encompassing TC assessment tool. Currently, the clinical judgement of a medical professional, taking account of the medical, legal, ethical issues informing a capacity or competency decision, remains the gold standard for assessing TC.

Interpersonal influences on decision-making capacity: a content analysis of court judgments

For many purposes in England and Wales, the Court of Protection determines whether a person has or lacks capacity to make a decision, by applying the test within the Mental Capacity Act 2005. This test is regularly described as a cognitive test with cognitive processes discussed as internal characteristics. However, it is unclear how the courts have framed interpersonal influence as negatively impacting upon a person's decision-making processes in a capacity assessment context. We reviewed published court judgments in England and Wales in which interpersonal problems were discussed as relevant to capacity. Through content analysis, we developed a typology that highlights five ways the courts considered influence to be problematic to capacity across these cases. Interpersonal influence problems were constructed as (i) P's inability to preserve their free will or independence, (ii) restricting P's perspective, (iii) valuing or dependence on a relationship, (iv) acting on a general suggestibility to influence, or (v) P denying facts about the relationship. These supposed mechanisms of interpersonal influence problems are poorly understood and clearly merit further consideration. Our typology and case discussion are a start towards more detailed practice guidelines, and raise questions as to whether mental capacity and influence should remain legally distinct.

Undue Influence from the Family in Declining COVID-19 Vaccination and Treatment for the Elderly Patient

This paper examines a patient with borderline mental capacity, where the healthcare team is conflicted about how to proceed. This case demonstrates the complicated intersection between undue influence and mental capacity, allowing us to explore how the law is applied in clinical practice. Patients have the right to decline or accept medical treatments offered to them. In Singapore, family members perceive a right to be involved in the decision-making process for sick and elderly patients. Elderly patients, dependent on mainly family members for care and support, sometimes submit to their overbearing influence resulting in decisions that fail to protect the patients' own best interests. However, the clinicians' own well-intentioned influence, driven by a desire for the best medical outcome can also be undue, and neither influence should seek to be a substitution for the patient's decision. Following Re BKR [2015] SGCA 26, we are now obliged to examine how mental capacity can be affected by undue influence. A lack of capacity can be found when a patient fails to appreciate the presence of undue influence or is susceptible to undue influence due to their mental impairment causing their will to be overborne. This then paves the way for the health care team to decide based on best interests, because the patient is determined to be lacking in mental capacity.

Toolkit for detecting misused epidemiological methods

BACKGROUND

Critical knowledge of what we know about health and disease, risk factors, causation, prevention, and treatment, derives from epidemiology. Unfortunately, its methods and language can be misused and improperly applied. A repertoire of methods, techniques, arguments, and tactics are used by some people to manipulate science, usually in the service of powerful interests, and particularly those with a financial stake related to toxic agents. Such interests work to foment uncertainty, cast doubt, and mislead decision makers by seeding confusion about cause-and-effect relating to population health. We have compiled a toolkit of the methods used by those whose interests are not aligned with the public health sciences. Professional epidemiologists, as well as those who rely on their work, will thereby be more readily equipped to detect bias and flaws resulting from financial conflict-of-interest, improper study design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation, bringing greater clarity-not only to the advancement of knowledge, but, more immediately, to policy debates.

METHODS

The summary of techniques used to manipulate epidemiological findings, compiled as part of the 2020 Position Statement of the International Network for Epidemiology in Policy (INEP) entitled Conflict-of-Interest and Disclosure in Epidemiology, has been expanded and further elucidated in this commentary.

RESULTS

Some level of uncertainty is inherent in science. However, corrupted and incomplete literature contributes to confuse, foment further uncertainty, and cast doubt about the evidence under consideration. Confusion delays scientific advancement and leads to the inability of policymakers to make changes that, if enacted, would-supported by the body of valid evidence-protect, maintain, and improve public health. An accessible toolkit is provided that brings attention to the misuse of the methods of epidemiology. Its usefulness is as a compendium of what those trained in epidemiology, as well as those reviewing epidemiological studies, should identify methodologically when assessing the transparency and validity of any epidemiological inquiry, evaluation, or argument. The problems resulting from financial conflicting interests and the misuse of scientific methods, in conjunction with the strategies that can be used to safeguard public health against them, apply not only to epidemiologists, but also to other public health professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

This novel toolkit is for use in protecting the public. It is provided to assist public health professionals as gatekeepers of their respective specialty and subspecialty disciplines whose mission includes protecting, maintaining, and improving the public's health. It is intended to serve our roles as educators, reviewers, and researchers.

Conceptualising 'Undue Influence' in Decision-Making Support for People with Mental Disabilities

A crucial question in relation to support designed to enable the legal capacity of people with mental disabilities concerns when support constitutes undue influence. This article addresses this question in order to facilitate the development of law and policy in England and Wales, by providing a normative analysis of the different approaches to undue influence across decisions about property, contracts, health, finances, and accommodation. These are all potential contexts for supporting legal capacity, and, in doing so, the article compares approaches to undue influence that are rarely considered together. Drawing on the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, third sector and public body documents, and law in England and Wales, the analysis identifies six models that conceptualise undue influence in terms of: modes of influence; an overborne will; an inference from the situation; an overborne will understood as a mental incapacity; an overborne will in connection with vulnerability; and impaired discursive control. This final approach is a novel proposal for understanding undue influence. The analysis highlights key policy-relevant issues that distinguish the models, and generates a deliberative framework for navigating them, with the 'overborne will', 'inference-based', and 'discursive control' models identified as potentially fitting for the support context.

Bioethics and the use of social media for medical crowdfunding

BACKGROUND

Social media has globalised compassion enabling requests for donations to spread beyond geographical boundaries. The use of social media for medical crowdfunding links people with unmet healthcare needs to charitable donors. There is no doubt that fundraising campaigns using such platforms facilitates access to financial resources to the benefit of patients and their caregivers.

MAIN TEXT

This paper reports on a critical review of the published literature and information from other online resources discussing medical crowdfunding and the related ethical questions. The review highlighted the benefits of crowdfunding as well as the under-exploration of the risk of having patients' desires and human rights undermined during online fundraising campaigns. Majority of these campaigns get initiated on behalf of the patients, especially the very sick and dependant. The ethical questions raised relate to the voluntariness of informed consent and the possibility of patients being used as a means to an end. Vulnerability of patients may expose them to coercion, undue influence, manipulation, and violation of their human rights. The success of these campaigns is influenced by the digital skills, pre-existing social networks and, the emotional potency. Healthcare is a public good, and online market forces should not determine access to essential health services. The benefits of crowdfunding cannot be subverted, but it can perpetuate unintended injustices, especially those arising from socio-economic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Policymakers ought to monitor the utilisation of crowdfunding sites to identify policy failures and unmet essential health care needs responsible for driving individuals to use these platforms. The upholding of human rights and the fundamental respect of the individual's wishes is a moral imperative. The need for an ethics framework to guide different stakeholders during medical crowdfunding needs further examination.

Compensation of subjects for participation in biomedical research in resource - limited settings: a discussion of practices in Malawi

BACKGROUND

Compensating participants of biomedical research is a common practice. However, its proximity with ethical concerns of coercion, undue influence, and exploitation, demand that participant compensation be regulated. The objective of this paper is to discuss the current regulations for compensation of research participants in Malawi and how they can be improved in relation to ethical concerns of coercion, undue influence, and exploitation.

MAIN TEXT

In Malawi, national regulations recommend that research subjects be compensated with a stipend of US$10 per study visit. However, no guidance is provided on how this figure was determined and how it should be implemented. While necessary to prevent exploitation, the stipend may expose the very poor to undue influence. The stipend may also raise the cost of doing research disadvantaging local researchers and may have implications on studies where income stipend is the intervention under investigation. We recommend that development and implementation of guidelines of this importance involve interested parties such as the research community and patient groups.

CONCLUSION

Compensating human research subjects is important but can also act as a barrier to voluntary participation and good research efforts. Deliberate measures need to be put in place to ensure fair compensation of research participants, avoid their exploitation and level the field for locally funded research.

Will-making in Irish nursing homes: Staff perspectives on testamentary capacity and undue influence

Allegations of lack of testamentary capacity or of undue influence are grounds for many disputed wills. Some people who make (or change an existing) will are resident in a nursing home. A substantial proportion of this population have cognitive or communication difficulties or are physically frail, and concerns regarding testamentary capacity or undue influence may be more likely to arise as a result. A questionnaire examining the experiences and views of staff regarding will-making by nursing home residents was posted to the Directors of Nursing of a random sample of 148 of the approximately 600 nursing homes in the Republic of Ireland and 81 responded. Over 10% of respondents reported seeing cases where they felt a resident who lacked capacity was visited by a solicitor or where a resident was placed under undue pressure to make or change a will or both. In most such cases, staff felt they could do little to intervene. In general, responses to the questionnaire suggested staff misunderstanding of the confidential nature of the relationship between a solicitor and a client and that respondents had an exaggerated view of the power and responsibility of doctors and of family members to influence residents' decisions and interactions with solicitors regarding will-making. This study suggests the need for improved Guidelines for staff regarding will-making in residential care including advice on how to proceed where concerns including undue pressure arise.

Legal Standards for Brain Death and Undue Influence in Euthanasia Laws

A major appellate court decision from the United States seriously questions the legal sufficiency of prevailing medical criteria for the determination of death by neurological criteria. There may be a mismatch between legal and medical standards for brain death, requiring the amendment of either or both. In South Australia, a Bill seeks to establish a legal right for a defined category of persons suffering unbearably to request voluntary euthanasia. However, an essential criterion of a voluntary decision is that it is not tainted by undue influence, and this Bill falls short of providing adequate guidance to assess for undue influence.

Tensions among siblings in parent care

From a place of "genealogical equivalence" as children of their parents, siblings spend a lifetime developing separate identities. As parents near the end of their lives, issues of sibling equivalence are renegotiated in the face of equal obligations to provide care and equal entitlement to parent assets. In this paper, we hypothesize how unresolved issues of rivalry for parent affection/attention among siblings may be reasserted when parents need care. Data are drawn from a project about how parent care and assets are shared. In-depth interviews with three sibling groups experiencing conflict over sharing parent care and assets along with six Canadian legal case portrayals of disputes among siblings over how parent care and assets were shared are examined. Findings are that disputes occur when siblings perceive others as dominating parent care and assets through tactics such as separating the parent from other siblings and preventing other siblings from being engaged in decisions about care and assets. Discussion is focused on paradoxes faced by siblings given expectations for equity in parent relationships alongside perceived pre-eminence in care and asset decisions.