Skip to main content
Book cover

Competency pp 149–164Cite as

Medical Treatment Decisions and Competency in the Eyes of the Law: A Brief Survey

  • Chapter
  • 108 Accesses

Part of the book series: Philosophy and Medicine ((PHME,volume 39))

Abstract

The question of mental competence arises in many different areas of the law. In order to make contracts and wills, have criminal responsibility, be a witness, or stand trial, a person must be mentally competent. Obviously, however, not every degree of mental deficiency or peculiarity is legally significant. Moreover, there is no single test of competence for these various contexts; rather, competency is defined in different ways for different purposes [56]. As a result, and somewhat paradoxically, a person can be legally incompetent in some areas while remaining legally competent in others. For example, since the law requires a lower degree of capacity in the making of wills than it does for the execution of contracts, one may be competent to make a will but incompetent to transact ordinary business affairs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

Cases

  1. Application of President and Directors of Georgetown College, 331 F.2d 1000 (D.C. Cir. 1964).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bellotti v. Baird, 443 U.S. 622 (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Border v. Kelso, 293 Ill. 175, 127 N.E. 337 (1920).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cobbs v. Grant, 8 Cal. 3d 229, 502 P.2d 1 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Commission of Corrections v. Myers, 399 N.E. 2d 452 (Mass. 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Department of Human Services v. Northern, 563 S.W. 2d 197 (Tenn. Ct. of Appeals 1978).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dexter v. Hall, 82 U.S. (15 Wall.) 9, 20 (1872).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dunham v. Wright, 423 F.2d 940 (3d Cir. 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Farber v. Sweet Style Manufacturing Co., 40 Misc. 2d 212, 242 N.Y.S.2d 763 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1963).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Grannum v. Berard, 70 Wash. 2d 304, 422 P.2d 812 (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Howe v. Massachusetts, 99 Mass. 88, 98-99 (1868).

    Google Scholar 

  12. In re A.C, 573 A.2d 1235 (D.C. App. 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  13. In re E.G., a minor, 1133 Ill.2d 08, 549 N.E. 2d 322 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  14. In re Holloway’s Estate, 195 Cal. 711, 733, 235 P. 1012, 1021 (1925).

    Google Scholar 

  15. In re Honigman’s Will, 8 N.Y.2d 244, 168 N.E.2d 676, 203 N.Y.S.2d 859(1960).

    Google Scholar 

  16. In re Quackenbush, 156 N.J. Super. 282, 383 A.2d 785 (1978).

    Google Scholar 

  17. In re Yetter, 62 Pa. D & C 2d 619 (1973).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Krasner v. Berk, 366 Mass. 464, 319 N.E.2d 897 (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lane v. Candura, 376 N.E.2d 1232 (Mass. App. 1978).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Long Island Jewish M.Ctr., 557 N.Y.S.2d 239 (Sup. 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Matter of Farrell, 529 A.2d 404 (N.J. 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Matter of Schiller, 148 N.J. Super. 168, 372 A.2d 360 (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mohr v. Williams, 95 Minn. 261, 104 N.W. 12 (1905).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Moore v. Webb, 345 S.W.2d 239 (Mo. 1961).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Hunt, 79 N.Y. 541, 545 (1880).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ortelere v. Teachers’ Retirement Board, 25 N.Y.2d 196, 303 N.Y.S.2d 362, 250 N.E.2d 460 (1969).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ryman’s Case, 139 Pa. Superior Ct. 212 (1939).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Schloendorff v. Society Hospital, 211 N.Y. 125, 105 N.E. 92 (1914).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Smith v. Seibly, 72 Wash. 2d 16, 431 P.2d 719 (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Thompson v. Leach, 3 Mod. Rep. 301, 87 Eng. Rep. 199 (1690).

    Google Scholar 

  31. U.S. v. Charters, 829 F.2d 479 (4th Cir., 1987). (Later overturned en banc at 863 F.2d 302 (1988)).

    Google Scholar 

  32. United States v. George, 239 F. Supp. 752 (D. Conn. 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Uribe v. Olson, 42 Or. App. 647, 601 F.2d 818 (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Willett v. Willett, 333 Mass. 323, 324, 130 N.E.2d 582 (1955).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Younts v. St. Francis Hosp. & School of Nursing, Inc., 205 Kan. 292, 469 P.2d 330(1970).

    Google Scholar 

Articles and Books

  1. Alexander, G. and Szasz, T.: 1973, ‘From Contract to Status via Psychiatry’, Santa Clara Lawyer 13, 537–559.

    Google Scholar 

  2. American Law Institute: 1981, Restatement of the Law Second, Contracts 2d, A.L.I. Publishers, St. Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Annas, G. and Densberger, J.: 1984, ‘Competency to Refuse Medical Treatment: Autonomy v. Paternalism’ Toledo Law Review 15, 561–596.

    Google Scholar 

  4. (Annotation): 1969, ‘Mental Competency of Patient to Consent to Surgical Operation or Medical Treatment’, American Law Reports 3d 25, 1439–1443.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Calamari, J. and Perillo, J.: 1977, The Law of Contracts, 2nd ed., West Publishing Co., St. Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Capron, A.: 1974, ‘Informed Consent in Catastrophic Disease Research and Treatment’, University of Pennsylvania Law Review 123, 340–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cook, W.: 1921, ‘Mental Deficiency and the Law of Contract’ Columbia Law Review 21, 424–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dawson, J., Harvey, W. and Henderson, S.: 1982, Cases and Comment on Contracts, 4th ed., Foundation Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dresser, R.: 1984, ‘Feeding the Hunger Artist: Legal Issues in Treating Anorexia Nervosa’, Wisconsin Law Review, 297–374.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Green, M.: 1941, ‘Judicial Tests of Mental Incompetency’, Missouri Law Review 6, 141–165.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Green, M.: 1943, ‘The Operative Effect of Mental Incompetency on Agreements and Wills’ Texas Law Review 21, 554–589.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Green, M.: 1944, ‘Proof of Mental Incompetency and the Unexpressed Major Premise’, Yale Law Journal 53, 271–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Grotius, H.: 1646, Of the Rights of War and Peace, Book II.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Keeton, W. et al.: 1984, Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts, West Publishing Co., St. Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Keith-Speigel, P.: 1981, ‘Children and Consent to Participate in Research’, in Children’s Competency to Consent, Melton (et al.), pp. 179–207.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kelly, W.: 1960, ‘The Physician, the Patient, and the Consent’, Kansas Law Review 8, 405–434.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Leake, S. M.: 1912, The Law of Contracts (6th ed.), Stevens and Sons, Lmtd., London.

    Google Scholar 

  18. McCoid, A.: 1957, ‘A Reappraisal of Liability for Unauthorized Medical Treatment’, Minnesota Law Review 41, 381–434.

    Google Scholar 

  19. McCrary, S. V. and Walman, A. T.: 1990, ‘Procedural Paternalism in Competency Determinations’, Law, Medicine &Heath Care 18, 108–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Meisel, A.: 1979, ‘The “Exceptions” to the Informed Consent Doctrine: Striking a Balance between Competing Values in Medical Decisionmaking’, Wisconsin Law Review, 413–488.

    Google Scholar 

  21. (Note): 1974, ‘Informed Consent and the Dying Patient’, Yale Law Journal 83, 1632–1664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. (Note): 1959, ‘Mental Illness and Contracts’ Michigan Law Review 57, 1020–1118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. (Note): 1990, ‘Determining Patient Competency in Treatment Refusal Cases’, Georgia Law Review 24, 733–757.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Perlin, M. L.: 1990, ‘Are Courts Competent to Decide Competency Questions? Stripping the Facade from United States v. Charters’, Kansas Law Review 38, 957–1001.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Robertson, J.: 1991, ‘The Geography of Competency’, in this volume, pp. 127–148.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Roth, L., Meisel, A. and Lidz, C.: 1977, ‘Tests of Competency to Consent to Treatment’, American Journal of Psychiatry 134, 279–284.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wadlington, W., Whitebread, C. and Davis, S.: 1983, Cases on Children in the Legal System, Foundation Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Wadlington, W.: 1973, ‘Minors and Health Care: The Age of Consent’, Osgoode Hall Law Journal 11, 115–125.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Weithorn, L.: 1983, ‘Children’s Capacity to Decide About Participation in Research’, IRB 5.

    Google Scholar 

  30. White, P.: 1983, ‘The Common Law as a Model of the Patient-Physician Relationship: A Response to Professor Brody’, in E. E. Shelp (ed.), The Clinical Encounter, D. Reidel Publishing Com., Dordrecht, Holland, pp. 133–139.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Zimring, F.: 1982, The Changing Legal World of Adolescence, Free Press, New York, pp. 91–93. Unpublished Paper

    Google Scholar 

  32. ‘Position Statement: Standards Regarding Consent for Treatment and Research Involving Children’, American Psychological Association Third Draft: January, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1991 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

White, P.D., Denise, S.H. (1991). Medical Treatment Decisions and Competency in the Eyes of the Law: A Brief Survey. In: Cutter, M.A.G., Shelp, E.E. (eds) Competency. Philosophy and Medicine, vol 39. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3614-3_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3614-3_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-5603-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-011-3614-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics