The family v. the Family Court: sterilisation issues

1Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Abstract: Parents as guardians of minor children have the right and duty to give and withhold consent to medical treatment when the treatment is neither routine nor urgent. Parental authority, however, is not absolute and dwindles as the child gradually matures. In general, teenagers can give consent to medical treatment if they understand the nature and consequences of the proposed treatment. The diminution of parental authority is based on the premise that the child will eventually become autonomous. In cases where a sterilisation or hysterectomy procedure is being considered for a severely intellectually disabled teenager the question of consent is most contentious. Should this power belong to parents or the state? This paper examines some recent Family Court cases concerning this issue and also addresses questions about human rights, medical autonomy and the role of the Family Court. Finally, a proposal for an alternative means of decision‐making in these cases is briefly outlined. 1992 Public Health Association of Australia

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Petersen, K. (1992). The family v. the Family Court: sterilisation issues. Australian Journal of Public Health, 16(2), 196–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-6405.1992.tb00052.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free