Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 43 - Decision-Making in Civil Matters

  • from Part V - Other Legal Decision-Making
  • Edited by Monica K. Miller, University of Nevada, Reno, Logan A. Yelderman, Prairie View A & M University, Texas, Matthew T. Huss, Creighton University, Omaha, Jason A. Cantone, George Mason University, Virginia
  • Book:
    The Cambridge Handbook of Psychology and Legal Decision-Making
    Published online:
    22 February 2024
    Print publication:
    29 February 2024, pp 664-674

  • Summary

    The law presumes that all persons are capable of guiding their own day-to-day lives, but the presence of various types and degrees of mental disability or mental incapacity can call this capability into question. When competency is convincingly demonstrated to be impaired, to the extent that decision-making requires input, persistent guidance, or outright control by some external entity, the civil courts might elect at that juncture to impose some form of “substituted judgment.” Substituted judgment undertakes to address three broad and potentially overlapping decision-making domains, described here with brief accompanying examples: prior judgment (regarding wills and other advance directives), present judgment (regarding informed consent and the corresponding right to refuse treatment), and future judgment (regarding guardianship and conservatorship). This chapter will explore each of these domains in detail, identifying the contributions mental health professionals can make to reliable and valid forensic assessment in this regard.