英国law assignment代写 儿童法案
英国law assignment代写 儿童法案
The parent’s consent and the courts involvement are enough to establish consent for a child. If parents consented to a medical treatment, the court shall accept that consent according to children act 1989 section 2 (7) “Where more than one person has parental responsibility for a child each of them may act alone and without the other (or others) in meeting that responsibility; but nothing in this Part shall be taken to affect the operation of any enactment which requires the consent of more than one person in a matter affecting the child” which means that the parents’ consent will be enough to establish the consent requirement and relief the doctor from his/her liability. In the case of Re J it had been established that without both parent’s consent on the matter the consent shall be deemed ineffective, which implicates that children’s consent is rendered useless if the parent’s consented on his behalf. The courts involvement occurs where the doctor needs to act on the best interest of the child but one of the parents have refused to consent on the medical treatment, in that case the child or another adult will have the power to seek a declaration to the court in order to make the treatment lawful. The court’s reasoning for the declaration is the court seeks the best interest of the child where it would be unlawful to refuse a treatment where the doctor believes it’s the best interest of the child, this was established in the case of Re C the decision on the case was that the judge ordered the mother’s to provide the best treatment of the judge. the case of Re C it established that when it comes to the interest of the child the courts will always look at their best interest rather than the child’s decision. This establishes that doesn’t matter whether the child agrees to the medical treatment of not the courts will always enforce an order to provide a recommended treatment for the child and the doctors will not be held liable for the lack of consent. This has undermined the children’s rights to refuse a treatment as an adult, on the basis that the courts don’t look at whether the child consents on the treatment, nor parents they decide based on the best interest of the child. Even if the Gillick’s competence can be applied then it should not be binding, because the courts will look at the best interest of the child rather than the consent of the child.
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。