No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Co-decision-making in the assisted decision-making (Capacity) Act 2015: challenges and complexities
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 October 2025
Abstract
Co-decision-making is the middle of the three new tiers of support for those whose capacity is in question or lacking under the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act 2015. In co-decision-making, decision-making authority is shared jointly between the person and their chosen co-decision-maker. Co-decision-making is a new and challenging concept and the capacity test to be applied by healthcare professional assessors is complex. I suggest that thinking about the minimum requirements for joint decision-making and about the idea of ‘partial capacity’ are helpful in determining where co-decision-making fits on a capacity spectrum. Whatever the difficulties, co-decision-making is a core support arrangement in the new law, and there is a responsibility on all seeking to support a relevant person to work to ensure it is a viable and useful option.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Perspective Piece
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of College of Psychiatrists of Ireland
References
Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2014) General Comment No. 1 on Equal Recognition before the Law. CRPD/C/GC/1Google Scholar
Curley, A, Murphy, R, Plunkett, R and Kelly, BD (2019a) Categorical mental capacity for treatment decisions among psychiatry inpatients in Ireland. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 64, 53–59.10.1016/j.ijlp.2019.02.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curley, A, Murphy, R, Plunkett, R and Kelly, BD (2019b) Concordance of mental capacity assessments based on legal and clinical criteria: A cross-sectional study of psychiatry inpatients. Psychiatry Research 276, 160–166.10.1016/j.psychres.2019.05.015CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Donnelly, M (2019) Deciding in dementia: The possibilities and limits of supported decision-making. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 66, 101466.10.1016/j.ijlp.2019.101466CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, BD (2017) The assisted decision-making (Capacity) act 2015: what it is and why it matters. Irish Journal of Medical Science 186, 351–356.10.1007/s11845-016-1443-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grisso, T and Applebaum, PS (1998) MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T). Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.10.1093/oso/9780195103724.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Largent, EA, Clapp, J, Blumenthal-Barby, JS, Grady, C, McGuire, AL, Karlawish, J, Grill, JD, Stites, SD and Peterson, A (2022) Deciding with others: interdependent decision-making. Hastings Center Report 52, 23–32.10.1002/hast.1444CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Law Commission of Ontario (2017) Legal Capacity, Decision-Making and Guardianship. Law Commission of Ontario.Google Scholar
Ordinaire, L (2017) Who decides now and to what extent: a critical reading of the assisted decision-making (Capacity) act 2015. Hibernian Law Journal 16, 91–109.Google Scholar
Morrissey, FE (2010) Advance directives in mental health care: hearing the voice of the mentally ill. Medico Legal journal of Ireland 16, 1.Google Scholar
Surtees, D (2012) How goes the battle - an exploration of guardianship reform. Alberta Law Review 50, 115–127.10.29173/alr270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations (2006) Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Treaty Series, 2515, 3. (https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-2.html). Accessed 28 January 2025.Google Scholar
Westlund, AC (2009) Rethinking relational autonomy. Hypatia 24, 26–49.10.1111/j.1527-2001.2009.01056.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar