Title: Assessing Capacity, Competence, and Controversies in Decision Making, Death, and Medical Ethics

Part 1:
Does Roger Have Decision Making Capacity?

Watch the assigned video, in which a social worker is assessing an adult’s capacity to make decisions about money. The adult, Roger, has intellectual disabilities and resides in a supported living facility. Answer the following questions in your post:
Do you think Roger has the capacity to make decisions about money or not?
What about the social worker’s interview makes you think that Roger has, or does not have, the capacity to make financial decisions?
Write succinct and clear answers to these questions.
Part 2:

In this case simulation, you will will apply the concept of competence to the facts of a particular case. Answer the following questions when responding to the case: 
Briefly define the criteria for decision making capacity (e.g., understanding, appreciation, reasoning, and communication). 
Apply the criteria of decision making capacity to the facts of the Mary Northern case. 
Evaluate whether you think Mary Northern should have been allowed to refuse doctor’s recommendations for an amputation.
The Case of Mary Northern
Mary C. Northern was a 72 year old from Tennessee (JUSTIA US Law, n.d.).  She was admitted to the hospital for pneumonia. While in the hospital, she was found to have gangrene in both feet. The physicians were convinced that her life was in danger if her feet were not amputated (JUSTIA US Law, n.d.).  However, Ms. Northern refused to believe that there was a serious problem. She stated that her feet were only dirty. Ms. Northern refused to have her feet amputated. Tennessee Department of Human Services asked the courts to step in.
Upon evaluation, she had good memory, responded to questions appropriately, and was found to have sound mind (JUSTIA US Law, n.d.). However, when it came to her feet, she was unable to recognize that, without amputation, her infection would worsen and she would likely die. On the one hand she wanted to live. But on the other, she would not consent to the amputation.
Doctor’s petitioned the court to amputate her feet without her consent. An attorney appointed for Ms. Northern argued that the doctors were violating her liberty and autonomy to make her own medical decisions; the right to be left alone. On the other hand, the attorneys representing the state of Tennessee argued that Ms. Northern was not of sound mind and that the state needed to make decisions for her. 
The judge in this case was torn. The judge visited Ms. Northern in the hospital. After conversing with her about the recommended amputation, he found that she was unable to make decisions for herself.  Ms. Northern was made a ward of the state. The State of Tennessee, Department of Human Services, was assigned to be responsible for the personal welfare of Ms. Northern. Afterwards, the State consented to surgery (JUSTIA US Law, n.d.).
Tragically, on May 1, 1978, before surgery could take place, Mary C. Northern died in the hospital due to a blood clot from the gangrene.
The video below provides more information about the Northern case, including interviews and presentations from central players in the case.
Part 3: 
Defining Death –
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/02/05/what-does-it-mean-to-die
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jahi_McMath_case
Now that you know a little bit about the concept, measurement, and controversies of death, let’s explore this with the Jahi McMath case. Answer the following questions:
Do you think Jahi is dead or alive?
If you think Jahi is dead, why? What theory or framework of death are you appealing to?
Do you think Jahi’s doctors were wrong in recommending the withdrawal of care?
Write succinct and clear answers to these questions.