Logo Oapen
  • Search
  • Join
    • Deposit
    • For Librarians
    • For Publishers
    • For Researchers
    • Funders
    • Resources
    • OAPEN
    • For Librarians
    • For Publishers
    • For Researchers
    • Funders
    • Resources
    • OAPEN
    View Item 
    •   OAPEN Home
    • View Item
    •   OAPEN Home
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Chapter 5 In defense of a conditional harm threshold test for paediatric decision-making

    Thumbnail
    Download PDF Viewer
    Author(s)
    Wilkinson, Dominic
    Collection
    Wellcome
    Language
    English
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    The case of Charlie Gard raises a number of serious ethical questions, including how a child’s best interests should be assessed, the role of parents in decision-making for a child, the appropriateness of trying untested experimental treatment in a serious ill child, and the allocation of limited healthcare resources. Elsewhere, I have reviewed these questions in some detail and explored the implications for future disputes over medical treatment for children.1 In this chapter, I will focus on one of the questions that arose in the Gard case and was also raised in the subsequent case of Alfie Evans. If there is disagreement between parents and health professionals about treatment for a child, should courts overrule parents on the basis of an assessment of what would be best for the child, or only if what the parents propose would be harmful for the child? I will largely focus on the ethical question (and leave the more specific legal questions to other commentators in this volume).2 I outline the ethical case for using a harm threshold test rather than a best interests test, identifying a set of cases where these tests may yield different decisions. I respond to a series of counterarguments against the use of harm thresholds. In the last part of the chapter, I propose a compromise, a conditional harm threshold test that would apply only if there is a question of preventing parents from pursuing treatment that other health professionals are offering to provide. I explore the implications of this test for a set of challenging cases similar to the Gard/Evans cases, setting out two different alternatives for evaluating the harm of prolonging life in children with absent consciousness.
    Book
    Parental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harms
    URI
    https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/48383
    Keywords
    ethical decisions; child; parents; Gard case; Alfie Evans
    ISBN
    9781509924912
    Publisher
    Hart Publishing
    Publisher website
    https://www.bloomsburyprofessional.com/hart/
    Publication date and place
    Oxford, 2019
    Grantor
    • Wellcome Trust
    Classification
    Medicine: general issues
    Pages
    17
    Rights
    https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    • Imported or submitted locally

    Browse

    All of OAPENSubjectsPublishersLanguagesCollections

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Export

    Repository metadata
    Logo Oapen
    • For Librarians
    • For Publishers
    • For Researchers
    • Funders
    • Resources
    • OAPEN

    Newsletter

    • Subscribe to our newsletter
    • view our news archive

    Follow us on

    License

    • If not noted otherwise all contents are available under Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

    Credits

    • logo EU
    • This project received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 683680, 810640, 871069 and 964352.

    OAPEN is based in the Netherlands, with its registered office in the National Library in The Hague.

    Director: Niels Stern

    Address:
    OAPEN Foundation
    Prins Willem-Alexanderhof 5
    2595 BE The Hague
    Postal address:
    OAPEN Foundation
    P.O. Box 90407
    2509 LK The Hague

    Websites:
    OAPEN Home: www.oapen.org
    OAPEN Library: library.oapen.org
    DOAB: www.doabooks.org

     

     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Differen formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    A logged-in user can export up to 15000 items. If you're not logged in, you can export no more than 500 items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.