Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Childhood malignancies and decision making.

A R Holder1

  • 1Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.

The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine
|March 1, 1992
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Privacy and confidentiality in clinical research.

The Medical staff counselor·1991
Same author

Legal issues in bone marrow transplantation.

The Yale journal of biology and medicine·1990
Same author

Surrogate motherhood and the best interests of children.

Law, medicine & health care : a publication of the American Society of Law & Medicine·1988
Same author

Disclosure and consent problems in pediatrics.

Law, medicine & health care : a publication of the American Society of Law & Medicine·1988
Same author

Minors' rights to consent to medical care.

JAMA·1987
Same author

The welfare of surrogates and others.

The Hastings Center report·1986
Same journal

Chrysoeriol-Mediated Neuroprotection in Parkinson's Disease in Mice: Targeting Apoptosis, α-Synuclein Accumulation, and Functional Recovery.

The Yale journal of biology and medicine·2026
Same journal

Musicality is Preserved in Neurodegeneration.

The Yale journal of biology and medicine·2026
Same journal

Burden of Neurological Disorders in Resource-Limited Settings: Lessons from Pakistan for Global Neurology.

The Yale journal of biology and medicine·2026
Same journal

Comparative Analysis of Prenatal Stress Models: Placental and Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in Mice.

The Yale journal of biology and medicine·2026
Same journal

Computational Investigation of Flavonoid-Associated Molecular Pathways in Astrogliosis Modulation.

The Yale journal of biology and medicine·2026
Same journal

Regulation and Interaction Among SOCS1 and SOCS3 by MicroRNAs in Multiple Sclerosis: A Review and <i>In Silico</i> Analysis.

The Yale journal of biology and medicine·2026
See all related articles

Parents may face prosecution or have children removed if they fail to provide adequate medical care. Courts often uphold medical treatment, but complex ethical issues arise with life-prolonging therapies for child malignancies.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Ethics
  • Pediatric Law
  • Child Welfare

Background:

  • Child neglect is legally defined by the failure to provide "adequate" medical care.
  • Adequate care is typically defined by licensed physicians, with courts rarely arbitrating specific medical approaches.
  • Parental refusal of medical care presents significant challenges, especially in cases of pediatric malignancies requiring long-term treatment.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To explore the legal and ethical considerations surrounding parental refusal of medical treatment for children.
  • To examine the complexities of court-ordered medical interventions for minors with serious illnesses.
  • To discuss the evolving capacity of adolescents in medical decision-making.

Main Methods:

  • Legal and ethical analysis of child neglect statutes and case law.
Keywords:
Legal ApproachProfessional Patient Relationship

Related Experiment Videos

  • Review of principles governing parental rights versus state intervention in pediatric healthcare.
  • Examination of ethical dilemmas in pediatric oncology and end-of-life care decisions.

    • Main Results:

    • Courts generally prioritize a child's access to necessary medical care, sometimes overriding parental objections.
    • The long-term nature of cancer treatment complicates enforcement of court orders, raising concerns about parental flight.
    • Removing a child from the home for treatment imposes additional trauma on the already ill child.

    Conclusions:

    • Ethical questions arise when considering court-ordered, life-prolonging treatments with severe side effects versus parental preferences for palliative care.
    • Parents retain the right to refuse experimental research for their children, irrespective of potential benefits.
    • Despite increasing recognition of adolescent autonomy, courts are hesitant to permit minors to refuse life-saving medical interventions.