Are disturbed and normal adolescents equally competent to make decisions about mental health treatments? |
| |
Authors: | Edward P. Mulvey Faith L. Peeples |
| |
Affiliation: | (1) Law and Psychiatry Program, Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 3811 O'Hara St., 15213 Pittsburgh, PA |
| |
Abstract: | This study uses a structured vignette procedure to assess competency to make treatment decisions in two groups of adolescents, one at risk for institutional placement and the other a matched community sample. Scores on Factual Understanding (the ability to recall facts), Inferential Understanding (the ability to make inferences about those facts), and Reasoning (the ability to weigh risks and benefits of various treatment options and to make choices based on that reasoning) were compared. Results showed that while at-risk adolescents and their community, counterparts did not differ in their factual and inferential understanding abilities, the at-risk adolescents did significantly less well than the community adolescents in reasoning. This difference could not be fully explained by differences in verbal IQ. Girls, no matter what their risk status, scored higher than boys on the Reasoning scale. Implications for legal policies concerning adolescents are discussed. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|