Dudley Kenneth C, Goins R Turner
West Virginia University, Department of Counseling, Rehabilitation Counseling, and Counseling Psychology, Center on Aging, Morgantown 26506, USA.
J Aging Soc Policy. 2003;15(1):97-115. doi: 10.1300/J031v15n01_06.
This study examined the evaluations of capacity of alleged incapacitated persons (AIPs) between two states and compared the thoroughness of the evaluations to state law. These evaluations are frequently the only source of information on cognitive and psychiatric symptoms, functional abilities, and current treatments. One hundred nineteen evaluations of capacity were reviewed using the Guardianship Evaluation Review Instrument. Findings indicated that states differed on the AIP's age, presence at the court hearing, and description of current treatments. Overall, data suggested that evaluation thoroughness was substandard. In over 75% of cases, full guardianship was granted. Issues on terminology, concern regarding evaluators and courts, and ways for evaluators and the court to fulfill their responsibilities to older adults are discussed.
本研究考察了两个州对所谓无行为能力者（AIPs）行为能力的评估，并将评估的全面性与州法律进行了比较。这些评估常常是认知和精神症状、功能能力及当前治疗情况的唯一信息来源。使用监护评估审查工具对119份行为能力评估进行了审查。结果表明，两个州在AIP的年龄、是否出席法庭听证会以及对当前治疗的描述方面存在差异。总体而言，数据显示评估的全面性未达标准。在超过75%的案例中，授予了完全监护权。文中还讨论了术语问题、对评估者和法庭的担忧，以及评估者和法庭履行对老年人责任的方式。
