Children’s right to consent. first the children’s have a right to contribute on the decision if they have the right capacity, this is applied in some situations and might be consulted to a treatment. We move on to the Glick competence the law was not clear for doctors to act without the parent’s consent, where the doctor will be liable without the consent of the parents. However, after the case of Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech AHA 1986 the facts of this case Mrs Gillick were the mother of five children wrote to the health authority that none of her children receives any medical treatment or advice however the health authority refused, she sought a declaration from the court of appeal the declaration was approved by a majority of 3:2, the appeal made by the DHSS’s to the house of lord. Lord Fraser has established 5 situations in which a person under 16 years old seeking a treatment or a medical advice won’t require his/her parent’s approval the first situation is whether the girl has capacity to understand the doctor’s advice or not, the second situation is the doctor is trying to persuade her/his parents to consent for the medical advice but they refuse the third situation is “the person will continue having sexual intercourse with or without the contraceptive treatment” the fourth situation is the suffering of her/his mental or physical state is in jeopardy the final situation is the doctor must give the child a medical treatment for the child’s best interest. The Gillick case has shown that it is not impossible for a child to consent on the medical treatment and they have the right to refuse a medical treatment, children must understand the Doctors advice or sufficiently understand this was established in the case of An NHS Trust v A. What about in case of an emergency are children will be allowed to refuse a medical treatment according to the Gillick competence?
本段内容来自网络 并不是我们的写手作品 请勿直接剽窃，查重100%，造成后果与本站无关。如需定制论文请记得联系我们。