Article Text
Abstract
The “family rule” paper by Dr Foreman proposes a way of resolving the present uncertainty about medical law on children's consent and refusal. This commentary reviews how doctors' decisions are already well protected by English law and respected by the courts. The “family rule” appears to be likely only to complicate the already diffuse law on parental consent, and to weaken further the competent minor's position in cases of uncertainty and disagreement. It leaves the difficult questions about defining and assessing children's competence unanswered. This commentary suggests that these questions would be better resolved through professionally determined standards of good practice that respect children and parents, rather than through rules or laws.
- Consent
- child
- minor
- competence
- Gillick
- parents
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Other content recommended for you
- Children of Jehovah’s Witnesses and adolescent Jehovah’s Witnesses: what are their rights?
- What constitutes consent when parents and daughters have different views about having the HPV vaccine: qualitative interviews with stakeholders
- The limits of parental responsibility regarding medical treatment decisions
- Consenting children aged under 18 for vaccination and treatment
- Assessment of children's capacity to consent for research: a descriptive qualitative study of researchers' practices
- High court should not restrict access to puberty blockers for minors
- Consent in children’s intensive care: the voices of the parents of critically ill children and those caring for them
- Developing guidelines for medical students about the examination of patients under 18 years old
- The harm threshold and parents’ obligation to benefit their children
- Assent for children's participation in research is incoherent and wrong