Show simple item record

dc.contributor.editorGoold, Imogen
dc.contributor.editorHerring, Jonathan
dc.contributor.editorAuckland, Cressida
dc.description.abstractThis timely collection brings together philosophical, legal and sociological perspectives on the crucial question of who should make decisions about the fate of a child suffering from a serious illness. In particular, the collection looks at whether the current 'best interests' threshold is the appropriate boundary for legal intervention, or whether it would be more appropriate to adopt the 'risk of significant harm' approach proposed in Gard. It explores the roles of parents, doctors and the courts in making decisions on behalf of children, actively drawing on perspectives from the clinic as well as academia and practice. In doing so, it teases out the potential risks of inappropriate state intrusion in parental decision-making, and considers how we might address them.
dc.rightsopen access
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::M Medicine and Nursing::MB Medicine: general issuesen_US
dc.subject.otherparental rights; philosophical perspectives; child; serious illness; legal perspectives; sociological perspectives
dc.titleParental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harms
dc.title.alternativeMedical decision-making on behalf of children post Great Ormond St vs Yates

Files in this item


There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Chapters in this book