Capacity: What if They're Not Capable

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

sunlioness

Fierce. Proud. Strong
15+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
1,535
Reaction score
771
Hey everyone-

I'm neither a C&L nor a geriatric psychiatrist, but occasionally I get pulled to staff our C&L service. I seem to have the most difficulty when asked to evaluate a patient for decision-making capacity. I know the basics. If the patient understands his situation, understands the recommendation, and furthermore understands the risk of not following the recommendation, they are deemed capable. Got it.

Okay, but what if they don't understand all that? I can say they're not capable of making the decision, but can I do anything about it? I'm not a judge. Do I have the power to make the old lady who doesn't understand why her bed sores are dangerous go to a SNF when all she wants to do is go back home to her filthy apartment?

Members don't see this ad.
 
Hey everyone-

I'm neither a C&L nor a geriatric psychiatrist, but occasionally I get pulled to staff our C&L service. I seem to have the most difficulty when asked to evaluate a patient for decision-making capacity. I know the basics. If the patient understands his situation, understands the recommendation, and furthermore understands the risk of not following the recommendation, they are deemed capable. Got it.

Okay, but what if they don't understand all that? I can say they're not capable of making the decision, but can I do anything about it? I'm not a judge. Do I have the power to make the old lady who doesn't understand why her bed sores are dangerous go to a SNF when all she wants to do is go back home to her filthy apartment?

This is why I hated competency consults when I was doing C and L. I would usually leave some vague recs about consulting SW to appoint a substitute decision maker (that's how things were done in my state, there was a hierarchy regarding who could be appointed). Then it's up to the primary team and the "Decider"
 
Members don't see this ad :)
The higher the stakes or more invasive the procedure being considered, the higher the standard for evaluation of capacity as well. Plus capacity is a snapshot. A delirious patient may not have capacity at this moment, but it's harder to predict their capacity an hour, day, or month from now. Sending them to a SNF seems like a big step.

I prefer to push for capacity evals in temporary/reversible conditions or one-shot procedures. More permanent conditions or permanent interventions (like placement) I think need the courts involved for a full competency eval or conservatorship (California term). Ethics team is good medicolegal protection for major procedures over objection, such as neuro or cardiac surgery.
 
Hey everyone-

I'm neither a C&L nor a geriatric psychiatrist, but occasionally I get pulled to staff our C&L service. I seem to have the most difficulty when asked to evaluate a patient for decision-making capacity. I know the basics. If the patient understands his situation, understands the recommendation, and furthermore understands the risk of not following the recommendation, they are deemed capable. Got it.

Okay, but what if they don't understand all that? I can say they're not capable of making the decision, but can I do anything about it? I'm not a judge. Do I have the power to make the old lady who doesn't understand why her bed sores are dangerous go to a SNF when all she wants to do is go back home to her filthy apartment?

Not really.

"Capable" doesn't really capture the intent of decision making capacity. If there is a question in the patient's ability to adequately understand any of the above, a psych/neuropsych consult should be made. Even if they display a limited (often concrete) understanding of each aspect, they still may be significantly impaired and a risk to themselves.

In your example, you'd get the family involved (if available) and social work. The next step varies by state, but I have seen families pursue temporary guardianship quite quickly. If there is no family or legal guardian, it definitely gets stickier. Temporary v. more long-term planning is also a consideration.

The other side of the coin is a patient who is quite capable of meeting all of the criteria, but they choose to make poor decisions anyway. Your hands are tied, as they will discharge and stop taking their insulin, drink heavily, stop taking their psych meds, etc.
 
Thanks, everyone. It's pretty much what I figured and I often recommend neuropsych testing. It's just frustrating because it's such a complicated issue and people want quick answers because they wanted the patient off their service yesterday. And there just aren't any. Big reason why I don't like C&L, I think. One of many. :)
 
My understanding is that competency is something that is legally decided not by physicians but by courts/judges.

Capacity is something that is situational and can be reevaluated as treatment is ongoing or as patient gains or loses the cognitive ability to properly make such decisions.
 
Okay, but what if they don't understand all that?

Easy: they don't have capacity.

. Do I have the power to make the old lady who doesn't understand why her bed sores are dangerous go to a SNF when all she wants to do is go back home to her filthy apartment?

Unless something's different with the way your hospital handled it vs the places where I've done C&L, once you write down they don't have the capacity, your responsibility ends.

It's up to the primary doctor to decide. Often times several factors have to be put into place to decide the next step, and these are things that usually are outside your responsibility.

If they asked for a recommendation on whether or not the patient has capacity, you answered it, it's over.

Now if the primary doctor wanted you to answer other questions, like what to do if they don't have capacity, I can't give you an answer there but can tell you that this is likely really the primary doctor's responsbility, not yours, and unless the next decisions are within the scope of psychiatry, you could humbly wrote so in the chart and decline the request. (Better to call up the primary doctor and explain this diplomatically.)

I had a situation where a I had a consult where a patient was labelled as psychotic because she was emergency rushed to the hospital while having several pets at home and she was worried about their status because no one could feed them. None of the nurses would address her concerns (for days!) and eventually got fed up with her cries for help and labelled her psychotic and ordered a consult.

I figured out what was going on, after having to calm her down (she was very upset and crying), she did fine with concentration and memory, no history of mental illness, and after I told her I was trying to get to the bottom of what happened, it all came out. I wrote it in the chart, and the treatment team freaked out because it basically brought out the truth that they weren't listening to her concerns and for all we knew her pets were now dead from neglect, if not killing each other for food (I figure large dog and small dog, among several other pets, if starving may try to eat the other).

I got a call from the nurse who angrily demanded what they should do about it. I answered something to the effect of..., "I'm a psychiatrist, not a pet detective. This is not a psychiatric issue. Please call the social worker and the legal department. Have a nice day."

A few minutes later I got a call from the social worker, very worried, and demanding what they should do. I responded, "Did you ever go to a McDonalds and get lousy service, then go across the street to a pizza place and complain to the pizza people about the McDonalds?" She told me no. I responded, "Yeah well I'm the pizza place. It's not psychiatry. If you want to go to the administration and demonstrate how pets not being fed is psychiatry and can somehow be managed by me, knock yourself out."

At that time I was a resident. I had a feeling they were going to try to push me do handle this since they were counting on the "over-eager resident can be exploited because they don't know how the system really works" phenomenon. By that time, I knew what was going on, and I also figured that the more they complained about it, the more it would just expose what a huge problem they made, so I was willing to rattle that saber, especially since I was really just doing my job, and the nurses involved had a history of demanding psych consults for stupid reasons (Depression: patient is sad because the Eagles lost). It was their mess that they created. They should fix it.
 
Last edited:
Whopper demonstrates setting good boundaries of what "consult psychiatrist" means. Though the liaison might be better helped in that situation.

Reminds me of a story I heard of a resident a few years ahead of me. He's in the ED on-call, and the ortho resident comes up to him--
"I've got a consult for you. Guy with a history of schizophrenia, hope you can make some recs."

"That's fine. When I finish that I've got a guy with a history of a broken leg. Hopefully you can make some recs for him."
 
The issue of animals alone at home often comes up with people on hold admitted to inpatient. A simple resolution is to ask SW to call Animal Control. Why go through turf wars and blame each other when simpler solutions are available.
 
Why go through turf wars and blame each other when simpler solutions are available.

Totally agree. It was their job, not mine. I'm not a social worker. Their social worker called me up pretty much trying to get me to do her job for her. Trust me, I knew that was going on. I dealt with that med unit plenty of times. They were out to exploit new residents, but they didn't know I wasn't that.\

When I was a chief, I told residents to beep me if they smelled something funny. I didn't tell them to act on their own accord in these situations because there's an art and science to the way this game is played and I didn't want them getting in trouble.

In short, anytime staff members wanted to exploit a resident, and they only stood to get exposed if we put our feet down, I told them to do it. E.g. we will not consult the patient because no one ever even used a translator to begin with (often times we were told patients were psychotic when in reality the nurses were trying to get the psych resident to do an interview with a translator because they didn't want to do it themselves).

The reason why she was emergency rushed to the hospital was during an outpatient visit she was found to have A-fib. They rushed her without making any social appropriations for her pets. While that's understandable at that moment, once she was in the hospital and stabilized, the social worker and nurses should've listened to her. They did not. I never found out what happened to the pets. For the next few days, every single time I walked by that unit the nurses gave me a dirty look, and I felt if I brought up the issue again I'd be rubbing salt into their wound of the ego.

While I really do try to work with staff members well, you have to stand your ground with bad ones. These were the bad ones. Trust me on that. The particular unit had a nasty habit of trying to dump work not just on psychiatry residents but also medical residents. By the time it happened, the problem was going on for years, and I had talks with the medical dept about it.

When you got good staff members, you treat them very very well. Such as thing is hard to find. (And that's a problem for me because I got a unit now where that I think has the best treatment team in the hospital, and the fellowship wants to hire me. I got to pick either or and it's giving me a lot of stress.)
 
Last edited:
My favorite consults:

"Pt has history of Bipolar and has been off meds for 6 months."

"Pt is depressed."
 
Top