Professor Emma Cave emma.cave@durham.ac.uk
Professor
Goodbye Gillick? Identifying and resolving Problems with the Concept of Child Competence
Cave, Emma
Authors
Abstract
The landmark decision of Gillick v West Norfolk Area Health Authority was a victory for advocates of adolescent autonomy. It established a test by which the court could measure children's competence with a view to them authorising medical treatment. However, application of the test by clinicians reveals a number of ambiguities which are compounded by subsequent interpretation of Gillick in the law courts. What must be understood by minors in order for them to be deemed competent? At what point in the consent process should competence be assessed? Does competence confer on minors the authority to refuse as well as to accept medical treatment? These are questions which vex clinicians, minors and their families. A growing number of commentators favour application of parts of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to minors. In this paper, the limitations of this approach are exposed and more radical reform is proposed.
Citation
Cave, E. (2014). Goodbye Gillick? Identifying and resolving Problems with the Concept of Child Competence. Legal Studies, 34(1), 103-122. https://doi.org/10.1111/lest.12009
Journal Article Type | Article |
---|---|
Online Publication Date | Jan 2, 2018 |
Publication Date | Mar 1, 2014 |
Deposit Date | Jul 10, 2013 |
Publicly Available Date | Feb 25, 2014 |
Journal | Legal Studies |
Print ISSN | 0261-3875 |
Electronic ISSN | 1748-121X |
Publisher | Cambridge University Press |
Peer Reviewed | Peer Reviewed |
Volume | 34 |
Issue | 1 |
Pages | 103-122 |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1111/lest.12009 |
Public URL | https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1450107 |
Files
Accepted Journal Article
(255 Kb)
PDF
Copyright Statement
This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Cave, E. (2014), Goodbye Gillick? Identifying and resolving problems with the concept of child competence. Legal Studies, 34 (1): 103–122, which has been published in final form at http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/lest.12009. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.
You might also like
The infected blood scandal: lessons for clinical research.
(2024)
Journal Article
Liability For Rugby Related Neuro-Degenerative Disease: A Question of Tort
(2024)
Journal Article
Infected blood scandal – what you need to know
(2024)
Newspaper / Magazine
A Future Orientated View of Autonomy
(2023)
Book Chapter
Downloadable Citations
About Durham Research Online (DRO)
Administrator e-mail: dro.admin@durham.ac.uk
This application uses the following open-source libraries:
SheetJS Community Edition
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
PDF.js
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
Font Awesome
SIL OFL 1.1 (http://scripts.sil.org/OFL)
MIT License (http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.html)
CC BY 3.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Powered by Worktribe © 2024
Advanced Search