.png){kind=icon}
Family Law student resources is no longer available and it was replaced by Family Law 2e.
Chapter 10 Resource bank
Chapter 10 Resource bank
The medical treatment of children
Legislation
The key pieces of domestic English and Welsh legislation addressing this topic are the Children Act 1989, and the Family Law Reform Act 1969. As with all legislation, we recommend that you avoid legislation.gov.uk, and instead refer to a subscription database such a Lexis or Westlaw. This will ensure that you are working with an up-to-date version.
Television and radio documentaries
You may have access to a resource called Box of Broadcasts via your college or university. This is provided by the British Universities and Colleges Film and Video Council and gives on demand access to many television and radio programmes going back years, for educational purposes. Some programmes also include transcripts. There are many documentaries available. These include:
You're Killing My Son: The Mum Who Went on the Run (Channel 4, 2013)
Briefings - UK Supreme Court: Charlie Gard Judgment (BBC Parliament, 2017)
My Baby’s Life: Who Decides? (Channel 4, 2018)
Inside the Ethics Committee (BBC Radio 4, 27 June 2010).
https://learningonscreen.ac.uk/ondemand
General Medical Council, 0-18 All Years: Guidance for Doctors (2007)
This guidance note covers assessing a child’s or young person’s capacity to consent, sharing information about their medical status, and assessing their best interests.
https://www.gmc-uk.org/ethical-guidance/ethical-guidance-for-doctors/0-18-years
Royal College of Surgeons, Consent: Supported Decision-Making: A Guide to Good Practice (2016)
Guidance that sets out the principles for working with patients to help them make decisions. This webpage also contains podcasts that help illustrate these principles in practice.
https://www.rcseng.ac.uk/standards-and-research/standards-and-guidance/good-practice-guides/consent/
Britney Mazzoncini
Britney was a 16 year old who sought medical treatment for anxiety and later died by suicide by taking an overdose of the tablets. Her mother has argued that she should have been told about the treatment.
Kirsty Stewart, ‘Tragic Teenager’s Mother Calls for Parent Consent on Prescriptions’ (The Scotsman, 11 November 2016)
Janet Boyle, ‘Mum Calls for Change to Law after a Trainee GP Is Cleared over Her Daughter’s Suicide’ (Sunday Post, 2 April 2017)
https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/mum-calls-change-law-trainee-gp-cleared-daughters-suicide/
‘Ashya King: “Cruel NHS has not given us the treatment we need”, says father of five-year-old with brain tumour who fled to Spain’ (The Independent, 31 August 2004)
Aysha King was the subject of a police search when his parents took him from hospital in England to Spain in order to seek alternative treatment abroad.
Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans
Charlie was born in 2016 and died in 2017 of a congenital brain defect. His parents fought a long and high-profile legal battle to take him abroad for treatment that the courts found would be futile. The case therefore concerns the conflict between the child’s welfare and his parents’ rights.
Alfie Evans was a child in a very similar situation whose parents also fought fiercely to take him abroad to be sustained on life support. His case post-dates production of your textbook.
An article that outlines the Gard case history, with links to the relevant judgments, from the Transparency Project, a charity that aims to make family law clearer to the public: http://www.transparencyproject.org.uk/update-on-charlie-gard-case-the-last-stage-of-the-litigation-facts-and-sources/. Here is their article on Evans: http://www.transparencyproject.org.uk/alfie-evans-summary-and-useful-links/
A collection of Guardian articles on Charlie and the legal proceedings: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/charlie-gard
An American case
This article concerns an American case involving a teenager who argued (supported by her mother) that she should not undergo chemotherapy for cancer because chemotherapy would cause more harm to her. The Connecticut Supreme Court disagreed, holding that she was not a ‘mature minor’ (roughly equivalent to our Gillick competence) and therefore could not determine her own best interests. If you click on the picture on the article, it leads to a video about whether children should be left to decide these matters.