Mental Capacity under the English Mental Capacity Act
An Analytical Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35246/7k2tye47Keywords:
Mental Capacity, the English Mental Capacity Act, Capacity to Act, Factors Affecting Capacity, Mental DisordersAbstract
This study presents a descriptive and analytical examination of the English Mental Capacity Act 2005, one of the most significant legislative instruments concerned with protecting individuals who experience mental impairment while preserving their legal autonomy. The Act is founded on a core principle: capacity is presumed in every person, and it may only be rebutted through an objective assessment demonstrating an inability to understand, appreciate, or make a decision. The research seeks to analyze the legal and philosophical framework underpinning this legislation, highlighting how it strikes a careful balance between legal protection and individual freedom. Using a descriptive–analytical approach, the study examines relevant statutory and doctrinal texts, alongside judicial applications that have helped consolidate the notion of mental capacity as a functional and situational concept, rather than a fixed or permanent mental condition. The findings reveal that the Mental Capacity Act represents a fundamental shift in English legal thought, embodying a human-centered approach that promotes a more balanced and dignified understanding of capacity, reason, and personhood. This model could serve as an inspiring foundation for the future development of other legal systems seeking to reconcile protection with autonomy in a humane and equitable manner.
Downloads
References
i. Appelbaum PS and Grisso T, ‘The MacArthur Treatment Competence Study. I: Mental Illness and Competence to Consent to Treatment.’ (1995) 19 Law and Human Behavior 105
ii. Bartlett P, ‘Re-Thinking the Mental Capacity Act 2005: Towards the Next Generation of Law’ (2023) 86 The Modern Law Review 659
iii. Boyle S, McGee A and Wood F, ‘How to Determine the Capacity of a Person with Depression Who Requests Voluntary Assisted Dying’ (2025) 32 Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 276
iv. Buchanan A, ‘Mental Capacity, Legal Competence and Consent to Treatment’ (2004) 97 Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 415
v. Candia PC and Barba AC, ‘Mental Capacity and Consent to Treatment in Psychiatric Patients: The State of the Research’ (2011) 24 Current Opinion in Psychiatry 442
vi. Cavanaugh S, Clark DC and Gibbons RD, ‘Diagnosing Depression in the Hospitalized Medically Ill’ (1983) 24 Psychosomatics 809
vii. Craigie J and others, ‘Legal Capacity, Mental Capacity and Supported Decision-Making: Report from a Panel Event’ (2019) 62 International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 160
viii. Donnelly M, ‘Capacity Assessment Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005: Delivering on the Functional Approach?’ (2009) 29 Legal Studies 464
ix. Foster C and Herring J (eds), Depression: Law and Ethics, vol 1 (Oxford University Press 2017) <https://academic.oup.com/book/1525> accessed 11 October 2025
x. Giannouli V and Tsolaki M, ‘Depression and Financial Capacity Assessment in Parkinson’s Disease with Dementia: Overlooking an Important Factor?’ (2019) 30 Psychiatriki 66
xi. Hicks MH-R, ‘Physician-Assisted Suicide: A Review of the Literature Concerning Practical and Clinical Implications for UK Doctors’ (2006) 7 BMC Family Practice 39
xii. Hindmarch T, Hotopf M and Owen GS, ‘Depression and Decision-Making Capacity for Treatment or Research: A Systematic Review’ (2013) 14 BMC Medical Ethics 54
xiii. Holmes A and others, ‘Can Depressed Patients Make a Decision to Request Voluntary Assisted Dying?’ (2021) 51 Internal Medicine Journal 1713
xiv. Hotopf M, ‘The Assessment of Mental Capacity’ (2005) 5 Clinical Medicine 580
xv. Jeste DV and others, ‘Supported Decision Making in Serious Mental Illness’ (2018) 81 Psychiatry 28
xvi. Johnston C and Liddle J, ‘The Mental Capacity Act 2005: A New Framework for Healthcare Decision Making’ (2007) 33 Journal of Medical Ethics 94
xvii. Jones R, ‘Review of the Mental Capacity Act 2005’ (2005) 29 Psychiatric Bulletin 423
xviii. Jotterand F and others, ‘Ethics and Informed Consent of Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) for Patients with Treatment-Resistant Depression (TRD)’ (2010) 3 Neuroethics 13
xix. Marshall H and Sprung S, ‘The Mental Capacity Act: 10 Years on – the Key Learning Areas for Healthcare Professionals’ (2018) 8 Nursing: Research and Reviews 29
xx. Mendz GL and Kissane DW, ‘Agency, Autonomy and Euthanasia’ (2020) 48 Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 555
xxi. ‘Mind, ’Legal Newsletter’ (Mental Health Law Online, 25 May 2023) <https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Mind,_%27Legal_Newsletter%27_(March_2020)> accessed 28 September 2025
xxii. Morriss R and others, ‘National Survey and Analysis of Barriers to the Utilisation of the 2005 Mental Capacity Act by People with Bipolar Disorder in England and Wales’ (2020) 29 Journal of Mental Health 131
xxiii. Owen GS and others, ‘Temporal Inabilities and Decision-Making Capacity in Depression’ (2015) 14 Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 163
xxiv. Pawelec S, ‘Active Legal Capacity and Its Restrictions’ in Maciej Domański and Bogusław Lackoroński, Models of Implementation of Article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) (1st edn, Routledge 2023) <https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781003463016/chapters/10.4324/9781003463016-42> accessed 10 October 2025
xxv. Peisah C, Sheahan L and White BP, ‘Biggest Decision of Them All – Death and Assisted Dying: Capacity Assessments and Undue Influence Screening’ (2019) 49 Internal Medicine Journal 792
xxvi. ‘R v Cooper EWCA Crim’ (Mental Health Law Online, 26 April 2021) <https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/R_v_Cooper_(2010)_EWCA_Crim_2335> accessed 28 September 2025
xxvii. ‘Re Mary Gwanyama, MHLO’ (Mental Health Law Online, 8 October 2021) <https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Re_Mary_Gwanyama_(PFD_report_sent_to_Surrey_and_Borders_Partnership)_(2021)_MHLO_1> accessed 28 September 2025
xxviii. Ruck Keene A and others, ‘Taking Capacity Seriously? Ten Years of Mental Capacity Disputes Before England’s Court of Protection’ (2019) 62 International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 56
xxix. Saunders KEa, ‘Considerations in the Assessment of Capacity’ (2020) 48 Medicine 680
xxx. Shepherd V and others, ‘Research Involving Adults Lacking Capacity to Consent: A Content Analysis of Participant Information Sheets for Consultees and Legal Representatives in England and Wales’ (2019) 20 Trials 233
xxxi. Speker Obe B and Scully P, ‘The Mental Capacity Act and the Elderly’ (2009) 20 Current Anaesthesia & Critical Care 90
xxxii. ‘Verlander v Rahman’ (Mental Health Law Online, 29 May 2021) <https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Verlander_v_Rahman_(2012)_EWHC_1026_(QB),_(2012)_MHLO_49> accessed 28 September 2025
xxxiii. Wade DT and Kitzinger C, ‘Making Healthcare Decisions in a Person’s Best Interests When They Lack Capacity: Clinical Guidance Based on a Review of Evidence’ (2019) 33 Clinical Rehabilitation 1571
xxxiv. Walters TP, ‘The Mental Capacity Act--a Balance Between Protection and Liberty’ (2009) 18 British Journal of Nursing (Mark Allen Publishing) 555
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Licensing:
For all articles published in Journal of Legal Sciences, copyright is retained by the authors. Articles are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, meaning that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work.
Reproducing Published Material from other Publishers: It is absolutely essential that authors obtain permission to reproduce any published material (figures, schemes, tables or any extract of a text) which does not fall into the public domain, or for which they do not hold the copyright. Permission should be requested by the authors from the copyrightholder (usually the Publisher, please refer to the imprint of the individual publications to identify the copyrightholder).
Permission is required for: Your own works published by other Publishers and for which you did not retain copyright.
Substantial extracts from anyones' works or a series of works.
Use of Tables, Graphs, Charts, Schemes and Artworks if they are unaltered or slightly modified.
Photographs for which you do not hold copyright.
Permission is not required for: Reconstruction of your own table with data already published elsewhere. Please notice that in this case you must cite the source of the data in the form of either "Data from..." or "Adapted from...".
Reasonably short quotes are considered fair use and therefore do not require permission.
Graphs, Charts, Schemes and Artworks that are completely redrawn by the authors and significantly changed beyond recognition do not require permission.
Obtaining Permission
In order to avoid unnecessary delays in the publication process, you should start obtaining permissions as early as possible. If in any doubt about the copyright, apply for permission. Journal of Legal Sciences cannot publish material from other publications without permission.
The copyright holder may give you instructions on the form of acknowledgement to be followed; otherwise follow the style: "Reproduced with permission from [author], [book/journal title]; published by [publisher], [year].' at the end of the caption of the Table, Figure or Scheme.
