Under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005, a decision-specific capacity assessment refers to an assessment of a person’s ability to make a particular decision at the time it needs to be made. This principle is central to the MCA and ensures that capacity is not assumed globally but is specific to each decision and can vary over time.

🧠 Key Principles of Decision-Specific Capacity Assessment (under the MCA 2005)

1. Presumption of capacity – Every adult has the right to make their own decisions unless it is shown that they lack capacity.

2. Decision-specific – Capacity is assessed in relation to a particular decision, not generally.

3. Time-specific – Capacity can change over time, so assessments are valid only at the time they are made.

4. Support to make decisions – All practical steps must be taken to help someone make the decision before concluding they lack capacity.

5. Unwise decisions do not equal incapacity – A person is not to be treated as lacking capacity simply because they make an unwise decision.

🧪 The 2-Stage Test of Capacity (from the MCA)

1. Is there an impairment or disturbance in the functioning of the person’s mind or brain?

   • (E.g., due to dementia, learning disability, brain injury, mental illness, etc.)

2. Does that impairment mean the person is unable to make the specific decision when it needs to be made?

   • A person is considered unable to make a decision if they cannot:

     • Understand the relevant information,

     • Retain the information long enough to make the decision,

     • Use or weigh the information to make a decision, or

     • Communicate the decision (by any means).

🏦 Applying This to a Decision About Bank Access by a Third-Party Representative

If the decision at hand is whether a person can consent to a third party (like an appointee or financial advocate) accessing their bank account, a decision-specific capacity assessment would be applied as follows:

🔍 Step-by-step assessment:

1. Clarify the decision:

   • The specific decision is: “Can this person understand and agree to allow a third party to have access to/manage their bank account?”

2. Assess understanding:

   • Does the person understand:

     • What a bank account is and what it’s used for?

     • Who the third-party representative is?

     • What it means to give someone else access to their money?

     • The potential risks and benefits of allowing or not allowing this?

3. Assess retention:

   • Can the person hold this information long enough to make a decision?

4. Assess ability to weigh up information:

   • Can the person consider the pros and cons of giving access, and make a reasoned choice?

5. Assess communication:

   • Can the person communicate their decision clearly in some way?

🛠 If the Person Has Capacity:

• Their consent is valid.

• A formal record of consent (written or verbal) should be made.

• The person can appoint the third party (e.g. via a third-party mandate with the bank or by formally appointing someone like a Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) Appointee or Deputy under the Court of Protection).

🛡 If the Person Lacks Capacity:

• The decision may need to be made in their best interests, following the best interests checklist in the MCA.

• This could involve:

  • Involving professionals and family in discussions.

  • Considering whether a formal appointeeship or deputyship is needed.

  • Ensuring the least restrictive option is taken.