The limits of parental responsibility regarding medical treatment decisions

Parental responsibility (PR) was a concept introduced by the Children Act (CA) 1989 which aimed to replace the outdated notion of parental rights and duties which regarded children as parental possessions. Section 3(1) CA 1989 defines PR as ‘all the rights, duties, powers, responsibilities and authority which by law a parent of a child has in relation to the child’. In exercising PR, individuals may make medical treatment decisions on children's behalf. Medical decision-making is one area of law where both children and the state can intercede and limit parental decision-making. Competent children can consent to treatment and the state can interfere if parental decisions are not seemingly in the child's ‘best interests’. This article examines the concept, and limitations, of PR in relation to medical treatment decision-making.

[1]  Rachel Taylor.  Reversing the Retreat from Gillick? R (Axon) V Secretary of State for Health , 2011 .

[2]  B. Dickens,et al.  Adolescents and consent to treatment , 2005, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[3]  Sube Banerjee,et al.  Characteristics of the Detained and Informal Child and Adolescent Psychiatric In-Patient Populations. , 2003, Child and adolescent mental health.

[4]  G. Douglas.  The retreat from Gillick. , 1992, The Modern law review.

[5]  Rosy Thornton.  Multiple Keyholders—Wardship and Consent to Medical Treatment , 1992, The Cambridge Law Journal.

[6]  J. Eekelaar.  Parental responsibility: State of nature or nature of the state? , 1991 .