The role of parental consent is a significant factor in the medical world. To give consent to do medical operations or treatments, informed consent is needed. Consent cannot usually be given by children since they are not deemed competent enough, so the responsibility is given to the legal guardians. Many controversies have arisen due to minors needing consent from parents for medical procedures. Is giving parents the power to decide on their child’s medical treatment always just? I believe that parental consent plays both a positive and negative role in medicine. The paper will discuss the importance of consent in medicine, issues where parental consent was questioned, and times/laws where the minor’s decision on a medical procedure is more valued or when parental consent is overturned. This paper will also touch on several real-world examples where the role of parental consent is still debated on.
Who has the authority to make the
…show more content…
The mature minor rule states that a minor may consent to a medical procedure without parental consent if a court determines that the minor is mature and able to make that decision. Once a court rules that a minor is mature enough to give consent, then it unconstitutional for that right to be taken away. An additional method that minors may give consent is if they are emancipated. Emancipated minors include minors who are self-supporting, married, parents, in the military, or declared emancipated by a court. A minor may also gain situational emancipation. Situational emancipation is when the minor may consent to treatment if there is no legal guardian immediately available, and a delay in treatment may cause harm to the welfare of the minor. In addition, there are several types of treatments that do not require parental consent such as treatments concerning mental health care, birth control, and substance
Alan Goldman argues that medical paternalism is unjustified except in very rare cases. He states that disregarding patient autonomy, forcing patients to undergo procedures, and withholding important information regarding diagnoses and medical procedures is morally wrong. Goldman argues that it is more important to allow patients to have the ability to make autonomous decisions with their health and what treatment options if any they want to pursue. He argues that medical professionals must respect patient autonomy regardless of the results that may or may not be beneficial to a patient’s health. I will both offer an objection and support Goldman’s argument. I will
The minor's parent or legal guardian will provide the written consent required in the presen...
In pediatric cases, the parents/guardians are initially given the right to make decisions for their minor
Sexual intercourse between two people who willingly consent to the actions results in strong human emotional bonding. The act is permissible only when the two parties involved mutually desire to engage in sexual intercourse with each other. In the following case, the mutual agreement is broken. A man engages in sexual intercourse with his wife who is in a minimal conscious state and is paralyzed after an automobile accident. The wife is a 29-year-old woman who suffered from severe brain injury, leaving her unable to care for herself. She is only able to show some response to visual, auditory and tactile stimulation. In addition to being incontinent, she is unable to walk, talk, move or eat on her own. Despite her incapacities, her husband chose to continue the sexual relationship he previously shared with his wife, but consequently she became pregnant. The pregnancy was terminated because it was in the best interest of the wife’s health. The wife’s family considers the husband’s actions rape, and notified the police. The husband’s actions go against fundamental moral and ethical principles. The husband’s actions are deemed unethical because the wife’s incompetency disables her capability to consent to sexual intercourse, leaving her with no choice.
In America, the legal age to sign off on any medical consent is 18 years of age. Seventeen year olds should be able to compose their own medical decisions, and sign off on their own medical consents. Power should land in their hands, accompanied by the professional advice of a doctor. It is your body, be compelled to fabricate a decision without having to have your parent’s signature.
It was not until he was sixteen that a parole officer recommended he pursue legal emancipation. His freedom was finally granted at seventeen (Rupp 1&2). Emancipation is a court process that gives a teen legal independence from his or her parents or guardians and is granted adult civil rights except those prescribed by the law (Emancipation). Emancipated minors will not be automatically entitled to do certain things such as vote or legally drink alcoholic beverages. Though child abuse is one of the main reasons why children want to be emancipated, there are other reasons for children to want adult responsibilities.
...dical emergency where there is not time to wait for court overruling, the staff is not legally obligated to obtain parental permission; in this case two consultants should make an entry in the patient’s chart that procedure or transfusion was necessary to save the patient’s life. As a consequence and overruling from the court system, the state withdraws parental decision in order to protect and promote health of the child (Effa-Heap, 2009).
The doctors in Haiti thought Charlotte should not be resuscitated, undergo anymore horrible treatments and die peacefully. Charlotte’s parents were not happy with the doctor’s guidelines and thought the United States medical care would have better technology and could save their daughter. Charlotte’s parents bought her a doll which Charlotte’s parents thought otherwise, the Ethics Advisory Committee had to get involved. The debate surrounded if the doctors were in the right to control the life of someone who were incapable of deciding themselves, or is it the parents right. The Ethics Advisory Committee, stated that the parents were superior to those of the hospital and the hospital should conduct with less painful test.
Consent is an issue of concern for all healthcare professional when coming in contact with patients either in a care environment or at their home. Consent must be given voluntary or freely, informed and the individual has the capacity to give or make decisions without fear or fraud (Mental Capacity Act, 2005 cited in NHS choice, 2010). The Mental Capacity Act perceives every adult competent unless proven otherwise as in the case of Freeman V Home Office, a prisoner who was injected by a doctor without consent because of behavioural disorder (Dimond, 2011). Consent serves as an agreement between the nurse and the patient, and allows any examination or treatment to be administered. Nevertheless, consent must be obtained in every occurrence of care as in the case of Mohr V William 1905 (Griffith and Tengrah, 2011), where a surgeon obtain consent to perform a procedure on a patient right ear. The surgeon found defect in the left ear of the patient and repaired it assuming he had obtained consent for both ear. The patient sued him and the court found the surgeon guilty of trespassing. Although there is no legal requirement that states how consent should be given, however, there are various ways a person in care of a nurse may give consent. This could be formal (written) form of consent or implied (oral or gesture) consent. An implied consent may be sufficient for taking observation or examination of patient, while written is more suitable for invasive procedure such as surgical operation (Dimond, 2011).
Another ethical debate could be the ability to give informed consent. It can be argued that a child cannot fully be aware of what is happening until they reach a certain age (in South Australia, the age of medical consent is 16 years old) and therefore they cannot express their full informed consent for medical procedures until the age of 16 (MIGA, 2011). In any medical procedure, the patient must be informed about any risks and possible complications that may arise during the procedure and must be able to understand these risks and possible
Neonatal resuscitation is intervention after a baby is born to strengthen it’s breathe or to boost its heartbeat. Approximately 10% of neonates require some assistance to begin breathing at birth, but only 1% require serious resuscitative measures. Informed consent regarding neonatal resuscitation is a constant ethical debate. This discourse ordinarily occurs between doctors and parents; parents often feel that the decision has been made for them, believing that they were not fully informed of any consequences that may occur before making their final action plan, or thinking that their opinion was not taken seriously; however, doctors see the procedure in a different light, that the parents can’t choose the best option for the child regardless of counseling, or performing as the parents wished but believing that the result could have differed if the parents had known all the effects that it will have further down the line, or convinced that they would have made a better
Advocates of this issue believe that minors should have the right to be in charge of their medical decisions. Dr. Eric Kodish believes that decisions made by teenagers on the older side who are able to make a righteous decision should be carried out. “I think the ethics of modern American life suggest that if people have the capacity to make a decision, they should be free to refuse treatment” (Shute 1). Advocates of minors being able to make their own medical decisions believe that if the minor shows enough maturity understanding of their desired action, then it should be respected and carried out. Dr. Eric Kodish uses what he calls “The Rule of 7s” to determine when a child should be allowed to make the decision.
According to The Medical Protection Society (MPS 2015), consent it is needed for any treatment/intervention or care and this cannot be imposed by the healthcare team as ought be the expression of a patient 's wish and decision otherwise this is unethical and equally illegal. There are required elements in the process of informed consent. These include: Competence, disclosure, understanding, confidentiality, voluntariness and communication.
As we see in the world today many teens are becoming mothers before they finish high school or before they turn 18. Although some teens are on birth control already many are not because they are afraid to tell their parents which may lead to their parents thinking they are sexually active. Moreover, teens usually find themselves in a professional clinic trying to seek different options of birth control but they are derailed by having parental consent or notification. Many clinics have a policy were teen needs to have parental consent to receive birth control. Many parents feel that teens should be able to make the choice by themselves if they are having sex or just being careful. But the one question many parents are unable to agree upon is should teens be allowed to receive birth control without parental consent.
Cronin, H., Duggan, E., O'tuathaigh, C. and Doran, K. (2013) Attitudes of General Practitioners to Prescribing Contraception to Minors - A Medico-Legal Review. Medico-Legal Journal of Ireland [online], 19 pp. 28-33. Available at: http://login.westlaw.ie.ezproxy.wit.ie:2048/maf/wlie/app/document?&srguid=ia744cc64000001450ea3b61054c0346f&docguid=I0C630E0741C1444E8B5A4451F62D10C7&hitguid=I0C630E0741C1444E8B5A4451F62D10C7&rank=2&spos=2&epos=2&td=7&crumb-action=append&context=9&resolvein=true [Accessed: 29 Mar 2014].