Scholarly record
LIMITATION OF PARENTAL AUTONOMY AND ITS JUSTIFICATION IN CASE OF IMMEDIATE MEDICAL INTERVENTION
Abstract
In ideal circumstances, parents are the most devoted advocates for their children. They have first-hand information about the children and take care passionately about the childrens welfare. Therefore, the law recognizes parents as guardians of childrens welfare and gives them substantial autonomy in making decision for their children. However, sometimes the actions of well-meaning parents could be a subject of testing limits of parental autonomy. It is especially the case if their actions represent a risk for childrens well-being, as it was recently the case in Croatia where the mother refused chemotherapy as medical treatment for her ten-year-old child that suffers from cancer in order to provide a child alternative therapy. In that particular case the state intervened and limited parental autonomy to protect children, regardless the fact that a child could be treated with alternative therapy that is available in some EU countries. This case is showing us that justification of state intervention is difficult, as the state must balance between parental autonomy and well-being of children. However, the state could make mistakes, even in cases that are considered the best interest of the child and seek for the quick reactions of state agents in order to preserve childs health that is seriously threatened by disease. With an aim to analyse the limits of parental autonomy and its justification in case of immediate medical intervention, the author will define the philosophical notion of parental autonomy. Further, the philosophical notion will be compared with the legal principle of parental autonomy in order to determine the extent to which parental autonomy should be free of coercive intrusion of the state.
Publication Impact Profile
Publication details
References18
[1a] Diekema, D., S. (2004). Parental refusal of medicine treatment: the harm principle as threshold for state intervention. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 25(4), 243–264. DOI: 10.1007/s11017-004-3146-6.
[1b] Diekema, D. S. (2011). Revisiting the best interest standard: uses and misuses. Journal of Clinical Ethics, 22(2), 128–133. DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2015-102893.
Knepper, K. (1994-1995). Withholding medical treatment from infants: when is it child neglect? University of Louisville Journal of Family Law, 33 (1–2), 1-53. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11653286.
Chiu, E., M. (2008). The Culture Differential in Parental Autonomy, University of California Davis Law Review, 41(5), 1773-1828. Retrieved from https://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/.
Majka odbija kemoterapiju za svoje dijete. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.jutarnji.hr/vijesti/hrvatska/majka-odbija-kemoterapiju-za-svoje-dijete-drzava-joj-privremeno-oduzela-roditeljsku-skrb-kako-bi-lijecnici-spasili-zivot-bolesnoj-curici/7889286/.
Locke], [J. (1989). Locke on Parental Power. Population and Development Review, 15(4), 749-757. DOI: 10.2307/197259.
Schoeman, F. (1980). Rights of Children, Rights of Parents, and the Moral Basis of the Family. Ethics, 91(1), 6-19. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2380367.
Bigelow, J., Campbell, J., Dodds, S. M., Pargetter, R., Prior, E. W., & Young, R. (1988). Parental Autonomy. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 5(2), 183–196. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5930.1988.tb00241.x.
Birchley G. (2016). Harm is all you need? Best interests and disputes about parental decision-making. Journal of Medical Ethics, 42(2), 111–115. DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2015-102893.
Elliston S. (2007). The best interests of the child in healthcare. London: Routledge Cavendish.
Shah, S. K. (2013). Does research with children violate the best interest’s standard? An empirical and conceptual analysis. Northwest Journal of Law & Social Policy, 8(2), 121–173. Retrieved from https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/njlsp/vol8/iss2/1.
de Vos M. A, Seeber AA, Gevers SKM, et al. (2015). Parents who wish no further treatment for their child. Journal of Medical Ethics, 41(2), 195-200. DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2013-101395
[12a] Hrabar, D. (2016). Prava djece u obiteljskom zakonodavstvu. In D. Hrabar (Ed.), Prava djece – multidisciplinarni pristup (pp. 63-82). Zagreb: Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu.
[12b] Hrabar, D. (1991). Prava djece u porodičnim odnosima. Zagreb, Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu.
[13a] Šimović, I. (2016). Cijepljenje kao zaštita djetetova prava na zdravlje: obiteljskopravna i ustavnosudska perspektiva, In I. Baralić et al (Eds.), Cijepljenje i cjepiva (pp. 49-58). Zagreb: Medicinska naklada.
[13b] Šimović, I. (2016). Cijepljenje kao zaštita djetetova prava na zdravlje - obiteljskopravna i ustavnosudska perspektiva. In I. Bralić (Ed.), Novi izazovi u prevenciji bolesti dječje dobi: Cijepljenje i cjepiva, probir razvojnog poremećaja kuka (pp. 55-65). Zagreb: Medicinska naklada.
Goldstein, J. (1977). Medical Care for the Child at Risk: On State Supervention of Parental Autonomy. Faculty Scholarship Series, Paper 2448, 645-670.
Bester, J. C. (2018). The Harm Principle Cannot Replace the Best Interest Standard: Problems With Using the Harm Principle for Medical Decision Making for Children. The American Journal of Bioethics, 18(8), 9-19. DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2018.1485757.
View or Download full articleAccess options
SWS access login
Login as SWS Scientific CommitteeLogin as SWS Scientific PartnerLogin as SWS AuthorAuthors and approved SWS contributors will read and export their own linked papers after identity matching by SWS profile, email and SGEM GlobalID.
For librarian assistance: [email protected]
Purchase Instant Access
- Article can be downloaded after successful payment.
- Article may be used according to SWS library access terms.
- Article cannot be redistributed.
