Related Experiment Videos
Parental choice and selective non-treatment of deformed newborns: a view from mid-Atlantic
Insights
This study examines parental rights for newborn treatment decisions in the UK and US, finding similar legal uncertainties. It suggests developing agreed guidelines for parental consent and refusal of medical care for infants.
Area of Science:
- Medical Law
- Bioethics
- Pediatric Healthcare Policy
Background:
- Parental rights regarding medical treatment for newborns are a complex legal and ethical issue.
- Existing legal frameworks in the UK and US address parental decision-making for infants with disabilities.
- The legal landscape involves balancing parental autonomy with the child's best interests.
Purpose of the Study:
- To trace the development of parental rights in accepting or refusing treatment for defective newborn infants.
- To explore common trends in UK and US law to derive an acceptable policy.
- To address the legal uncertainties surrounding parental decision-making in neonatal care.
Main Methods:
- Comparative legal analysis of case law in the United Kingdom and the United States.
- Examination of key civil and criminal court decisions influencing parental rights.
- Review of constitutional law principles, particularly the right to personal privacy in the US.
Main Results:
- UK law on parental decision-making for infants with Down's syndrome likely resides in civil precedent (In Re B).
- US court decisions are significantly shaped by constitutional law and privacy rights.
- Despite similarities, both jurisdictions exhibit uncertainty regarding legal responsibility in parental decision-making.
Conclusions:
- A convergence of legal principles exists regarding parental rights in neonatal treatment refusal.
- There is a clear need for agreed-upon guidelines to navigate these complex ethical and legal issues.
- A proposed format for such guidelines is offered for consideration to enhance clarity and consistency.
Abstract:
This paper traces the development of parental rights to accept or to refuse treatment for a defective newborn infant in the United Kingdom and in the United States of America; its main purpose is to explore the common trends from which an acceptable policy may be derived. It is probable that the British law on parental decision-making in respect of infants suffering from Down's syndrome is to be found in the civil case of In Re B rather than in the criminal case of R v Arthur. United States court decisions are strongly influenced by constitutional law and reflect the right to personal privacy. The position on each side of the Atlantic seems very similar but this similarity includes a sense of uncertainty as to legal responsibility. There is a case for agreed guidelines and a suggested format is offered for consideration.