Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T13:49:38.940Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Consent in minors: the differential treatment of acceptance and refusal. Part 2 Minors’ decision-making and the reach of their capacity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2023

Tim Hawkins Open the ORCID record for Tim Hawkins [Opens in a new window]  and
Martin Curtice Open the ORCID record for Martin Curtice [Opens in a new window]
Tim Hawkins*
Affiliation:
Consultant in child and adolescent psychiatry with Cornwall Partnership NHS Trust. He works in a child and adolescent mental health out-patient service at Shaw House, St Austell, Cornwall, UK. He obtained a Master of Laws with Distinction in Mental Health Law in 2021 and has an interest in the treatment of depressive disorder in adolescence and the legal basis for treatment.
Martin Curtice
Affiliation:
Consultant in old age psychiatry with Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS Trust, based at St Michael's Hospital, Warwick. He obtained a Masters of Law with Distinction in Mental Health Law in 2003 and has an interest in mental health law and the Human Rights Act 1998 and has been widely published in these areas.
*
Correspondence Dr Tim Hawkins. Email: timothyhawkins@nhs.net
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This is the second of a pair of articles reviewing the topic of consent in minors. Both articles have a particular emphasis, drawing on theory and case law, on the differential treatment of acceptance and refusal in minors. This article considers the concept of capacity in young people (aged 16 and over) and competence in children (under the age of 16) by reviewing underpinning statute and case law with particular reference to England and Wales. This provides a platform for consideration of the reach of capacity in minors with regard to acceptance and refusal of treatment. In doing so the article explores the key, but still elusive, ingredient of maturity, which has significance to the process. Fictitious vignettes allow consideration of the application of the concepts of maturity and autonomy in clinical practice. The article also considers the potential for the UK's Parliament to make changes to current statute regarding consent in minors.

Keywords

Consent and capacityethicshuman rightsphilosophypsychiatry and law
Type
Article
Information
BJPsych Advances , Volume 30 , Issue 3 , May 2024 , pp. 177 - 188
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal College of Psychiatrists

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Akerele, F (2014) Adolescent decision-making and the zone of parental control: a missed opportunity for legislative change. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 20: 144–50.10.1192/apt.bp.112.010538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alderson, P, Montgomery, M (1996) Health Care Choices: Making Decisions with Children. Institute of Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
Appelbaum, P, Grisso, T (2001) The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR). Professional Resource Press.Google Scholar
Bainham, A (1992) The judge and the competent minor. Law Quarterly Review, 108: 194–200.Google Scholar
Billick, S, Edwards, J, Burgert, W 3rd, et al (1998) A clinical study of competency in child psychiatric inpatients. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 26: 587–94.Google ScholarPubMed
Billick, SB, Burgert, W 3rd, Friberg, G, et al (2001) A clinical study of competency to consent to treatment in pediatrics. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 29: 298–302.Google ScholarPubMed
Department for Constitutional Affairs (2007) Mental Capacity Act 2005: Code of Practice. TSO (The Stationery Office).Google Scholar
Department of Health (2004) Draft Mental Health Bill (Cm 6305-1). Department of Health.Google Scholar
Department of Health (2015) Mental Health Act 1983: Code of Practice. Presented to Parliament Pursuant to Section 118 of the Mental Health Act 1983. TSO (The Stationery Office).Google Scholar
Eekelaar, J (1986) The eclipse of parental rights. Law Quarterly Review, 102: 4–9.Google Scholar
Fortin, J (2006) Accommodating children's rights in a post Human Rights Act era. Modern Law Review, 69: 299–326.10.1111/j.1468-2230.2006.00586.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, M, Steinberg, L (2005) Peer influence on risk taking, risk preference, and risky decision making in adolescence and adulthood: an experimental study. Developmental Psychology, 41: 625–35.10.1037/0012-1649.41.4.625CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilmore, S, Herring, J (2011) “No” is the hardest word: consent and children's autonomy. Child and Family Law Quarterly, 23: 3–25.Google Scholar
Goldberg, J, Halpern-Fisher, B, Millstein, S (2002) Beyond invulnerability: the importance of benefits in adolescents’ decision to drink alcohol. Health Psychology, 21(5): 477–84.10.1037/0278-6133.21.5.477CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grisso, T, Appelbaum, P (1998) MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT- T). Professional Resource Press.10.1093/oso/9780195103724.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, J (2003) Consent and end of life decisions. Journal of Medical Ethics, 29: 10–5.10.1136/jme.29.1.10CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hawkins, T, Player, B, Curtice, M (2011) The zone of parental control and decision-making in young people: legal derivation and influences. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 17: 220–6.10.1192/apt.bp.110.008466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hein, IM, Daams, J, Troost, P, et al (2014) Accuracy of assessment instruments for patients’ competence to consent to medical treatment or research. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 5: CD011099 (https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011099).Google Scholar
Hein, IM, Daams, J, Troost, P, et al (2015) Accuracy of assessment instruments for patients’ competence to consent to medical treatment or research. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 7: CD011099 (https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011099.pub2).Google Scholar
HM Government (2022) Mental Capacity Act 2005 Code of Practice: Including the Liberty Protection Safeguards. HM Government (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1080137/draft-mental-capacity-act-code-of-practice.pdf).Google Scholar
Holt, A (2020) NHS gender clinic ‘should have challenged me more’ over transition. BBC News 1 Mar (bbc.co.uk/news/health-51676020). Accessed 24 Jul 2022.Google Scholar
Joint Committee on the Draft Mental Health Bill (2005) Draft Mental Health Bill: Session 2004–05 (Vol. 1) (HL Paper 79-1, HC 95-1. The Stationery Office (https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200405/jtselect/jtment/79/79.pdf).Google Scholar
Knoll, L, Magis-Weinberg, L, Speekenbrink, M, et al (2015) Social influence on risk perception during adolescence. Psychological Science, 26: 583–92.10.1177/0956797615569578CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lansdown, G (2005) The Evolving Capacities of the Child. UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.Google Scholar
Lyons, B (2010) Dying to be responsible: adolescence, autonomy, and responsibility. Legal Studies, 30: 257–78.10.1111/j.1748-121X.2010.00153.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAliley, L, Hudson-Barr, D, Gunning, R, et al (2000) The use of advance directives with adolescents. Pediatric Nursing, 26: 471–80.Google ScholarPubMed
Mill, JS (1859) On liberty. InOn Liberty and the Subjection of Women. Reprinted 2006, Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
Millstein, S (2002) Judgements about risk and perceived invulnerability in adolescents and young adults. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 12: 399–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodham, K, Brewer, H, Mistral, W, et al (2006) Adolescents’ perception of risk and challenge: a qualitative study. Journal of Adolescence, 29: 261–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, LF (1997) Health care decisionmaking by children: is it in their best interest? Hastings Centre Report, 27: 41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steinberg, L (2005) Cognitive and affective development in adolescence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9: 69–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supreme Court (2022) Permission to Appeal – April and May 2022. Judicial Committee of The Privy Council (https://www.supremecourt.uk/news/permission-to-appeal-april-may-2022.html). Accessed 24 Jul 2022.Google Scholar
Thornton, R (1992) Multiple keyholder – wardship and consent to medical treatment. Cambridge Law Journal, 51(1): 34–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Assche, K, Raus, K, Vanderhaegen, B, et al (2018) Capacity for discernment and euthanasia on minors in Belgium. Medical Law Review, 27: 242–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weithorn, L, Campbell, S (1982) The competency of children and adolescents to make informed treatment decisions. Child Development, 53: 1589–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
AC and Others v Manitoba (Director of Child and Family Services) [2009] SCC 30.Google Scholar
Bell and Another v Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust (University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Others Intervening) [2020] EWHC 3274 (Admin).Google Scholar
Bell and Another v Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust (University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and other intervening) [2021] EWCA Civ 1363.Google Scholar
Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority and Another [1986] AC 112.Google Scholar
Re (Axon) v Secretary of State for Health (Family Planning Association Intervening) [2006] EWHC 37 (Admin).Google Scholar
Re E (A Minor) (Wardship: Medical Treatment) [1993] 1 FLR 386.Google Scholar
Re R (A Minor) (Wardship: Medical Treatment) [1991] 4 All ER 177.Google Scholar
Re S (A Child) (Adoption: Consent of Child Parent) [2017] EWHC 2729 (Fam).Google Scholar
Re T (Adult Refusal of Treatment) [1992] 4 All ER 649.Google Scholar
Re W (A Minor) (Medical Treatment) [1993] Fam 64.Google Scholar
Re X (A Child) (No 2): An NHS Trust v X [2021] EWHC 65 (Fam).Google Scholar
AC and Others v Manitoba (Director of Child and Family Services) [2009] SCC 30.Google Scholar
Bell and Another v Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust (University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Others Intervening) [2020] EWHC 3274 (Admin).Google Scholar
Bell and Another v Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust (University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and other intervening) [2021] EWCA Civ 1363.Google Scholar
Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority and Another [1986] AC 112.Google Scholar
Re (Axon) v Secretary of State for Health (Family Planning Association Intervening) [2006] EWHC 37 (Admin).Google Scholar
Re E (A Minor) (Wardship: Medical Treatment) [1993] 1 FLR 386.Google Scholar
Re R (A Minor) (Wardship: Medical Treatment) [1991] 4 All ER 177.Google Scholar
Re S (A Child) (Adoption: Consent of Child Parent) [2017] EWHC 2729 (Fam).Google Scholar
Re T (Adult Refusal of Treatment) [1992] 4 All ER 649.Google Scholar
Re W (A Minor) (Medical Treatment) [1993] Fam 64.Google Scholar
Re X (A Child) (No 2): An NHS Trust v X [2021] EWHC 65 (Fam).Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.