The role of the courts in clinical decision making.
With advances in medical technology more can be offered with respect to treatment, for example, in neonates born prematurely. This raises the public's expectations of what medical professionals can offer and puts healthcare professionals under pressure to continue treatment, which may ultimately be futile. The courts may be asked to intervene in those cases where there is disagreement between parents and healthcare professionals. This may occur where doctors refuse to instigate or continue futile treatments or where treatment is not felt to be in the best interests of the patient. Cases may also be referred to the courts where doctors feel treatment options do exist but those with parental responsibility refuse to consent. Disagreement may also occur between parents. The best interests of the child are paramount and their welfare should always be the primary consideration. However, the court's opinion will be increasingly sought as parents' expectations increase and doctors fear litigation if they act against the parents' wishes. This paper reviews the role of the courts, using a number of high profile cases as examples. While the courts generally support the views of the healthcare professional, this cannot be guaranteed.
Leask
K
K
Academic Unit of Medical Genetics and Regional Genetics Service, St Mary's Hospital, Hathersage Road, Manchester M13 0JH, UK. kmleask@doctors.org.uk
D002648:Child; D002669:Child Welfare / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D003657:Decision Making; D006801:Humans; D018447:Medical Futility / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D033282:Parental Consent / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D010290:Parents; D011788:Quality of Life