Fifth, the prognosis without treatment is relevant to the substituted judgment decision. Sixth, the prognosis with treatment must be examined. Finally, the judge may review any other factors that appear relevant. Expert testimony probably is not warranted on the first three factors. These are issues of fact best gathered from the patient, her or his family and others who know the patient well.
Expert testimony is warranted on the fourth through sixth factors.
The final factor is sufficiently ambiguous to allow the court to seek evidence from any source and on any factor that the court deems relevant. The array and efficacy of treatments available to mental health professionals has increased dramatically in recent years. It can be extremely difficult for a mental health professional to watch as the court allows a patient to make a decision that she or he believes is not in the patient's best interest. Indeed, many mental health professionals feared that the Rogers decision would result in patients not receiving needed treatment. However, it is important to note that this seldom happens.