دانلود کتاب Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Young Children: A Comparative Perspective

فهرست مطالب :

Table of Contents\nList of Contributors\n1. Introduction\n2. Identifying Who and What, then How: Attending to the Role of the Decision-Maker in the Normative Debate about the Best Interests Standard\n I. Introduction\n II. The \'Who\' Question and the \'How\' Question\n III. Candidate Principles: Best Interests Standard and Harm Threshold\n IV. Clarifying the Decision at Hand: The \'What\' Question\n V. Role-Specificity\n VI. Moving Beyond Best Interests Standard Versus Harm Threshold\n3. Parental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harm: Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children in Belgium\n I. Introduction\n II. Exercise of Minor Patients\' Rights\n III. Parents\' Right to Consent to a Medical Intervention\n IV. Disagreement between Parents and Medical Professionals\n V. Conclusion\n4. \'Parental Rights\', \'Best Interests\' and the Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Medical Treatment of Children in Scotland: A Lack of Authority\n I. The Legislative Framework\n II. The Procedural Framework\n III. The Scots Law Approach to \'Best Interests\' in this Context\n5. Parental Decisions on their Children\'s Medical Treatment in Switzerland\n I. Introduction\n II. Decision-Making Ability and Competence of the Child\n III. Guidelines and Limits of Parental Decision-Making Power for Incompetent Minors\n IV. Dissent between Parents and Doctors\n V. Conclusions\n6. Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Minors: The Hong Kong Context\n I. Introduction\n II. The Legal Position in Hong Kong\n III. Sociocultural Factors Prior to Judicial Intervention\n IV. Conclusion\n7. Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children in China: A Multidimensional Analysis of Parental Authoritarianism\n I. Introduction\n II. Statutory Restrictions on Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children\n III. Parental Authoritarianism in Medical Decision-Making for Children\n IV. Multidimensional Analysis of Parental Authoritarianism in China\n V. Conclusion\n8. Parental Rights in Mexican Law\n I. Introduction\n II. Indirect Habeas Corpus8 1049/20179\n III. Legal Rights\n IV. Conclusion\n9. Decision-Making on Behalf of Children in the Research and Clinical Context: A United States Perspective\n I. US Legal Framework\n II. Access to Experimental Interventions in the US System\n III. Parental Decisions with Respect to their Children\n IV. Conclusion\n10. Withholding and Withdrawal of Life-Prolonging Treatment from Young Children in Israel\n I. Introduction\n II. Legislation\n II. Case-Law\n IV. Conclusion\n11. Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children in English and Welsh Law: A Child-Centred Best Interests Approach\n I. Introduction\n II. The Current Position Confirmed: The Best Interests Approach\n III. Two Challenges to Orthodoxy\n IV. Evaluating the Challenge to Best Interests\n V. Conclusion\n12. Parental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harms: Singapore and Malaysia Perspectives on Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children\n I. Introduction\n II. Threshold for Judicial Intervention and its Normative Basis\n III. Values and Considerations that Inform Judicial Decisions\n IV. Social Forces and Public Perception\n V. Conclusion\n13. Decisions about their Body: Children\"s Rights and Parental Responsibility in Chile\n I. Introduction\n II. Patient Rights and Responsibilities in Chile\n III. Latin American Context\n IV. Spotlight on the Children\n14. Who has the Final Word? On Trust and Legal Uncertainty within the Swedish Healthcare System\n I. Sweden and its Healthcare Regulation Generally\n II. The Requirements of Consensus and Consent in Swedish Healthcare\n III. Children\'s Rights and the Discretion of Guardians\n IV. The Municipal Social Welfare Committee\'s Ultimate Responsibility for Children – An Inadequate \'Solution\'\n V. The Trust and Consensus Paradigm as an Explanation for the Regulatory Gap\n VI. Who should have the Final Word?\n15. Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children in Ireland\n I. Introduction\n II. Background: Birth Rate and Decision-Making\n III. The Irish Constitution: The Role of Parents\n IV. \'Exceptional\' Cases\n V. Application of the \'Best Interests\' Assessment\n VI. The Influence of Professional Standards and Guidelines\n VII. Conclusion\n Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children in Ireland\n16. Decisionally Incapable Children and Medical Treatment Choices in Canada\n I. Introduction\n II. Parental Rights to Make Treatment Decisions\n III. State Intervention and Constitutional Restraints\n IV. Legislated Child Protection Regimes\n V. The Best Interests of the Child: Legislation and Litigation\n VI. Failure to Provide Necessities of Life\n VII. Conclusion\n17. Offering a Reasonable Future: Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Treatment from Infants in French Law with Illustrations from a Parisian Neonatal Resuscitation Unit\n I. Introduction\n II. Parental Authority\n III. The role of physicians\n IV. Limitation or Withdrawal of Treatment on the Basis of Unreasonable Obstinacy\n V. Offering a Reasonable Future to the Child and the Family: An Illustration of the Practical Application of the French Regime\n VI. Conclusion: The Articulation of the Power of Physicians to Withdraw Life-Sustaining Treatment and Parental Authority Remains Uncertain\n18. Parental Responsibility and Medical Decision-Making in Southern Africa: A Comparative Analysis of South Africa and Botswana\n I. Introduction\n II. Medical and Surgical Treatment\n III. Parental Consent to Children\'s Medical Treatment in Botswana\n IV. Conclusion\n19. Young Children and Healthcare Decisions in Spain: Who Decides?\n I. Introduction\n II. Parental Responsibility\n III. Consent to and Refusal of Medical Treatment\n IV. Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Treatment and Request for Experimental Treatment\n V. Conclusion\n20. Who Decides the Best Interests of the Child in the End-of-Life Process? A Look at the Peruvian and Argentine Reality\n I. Introduction\n II. Argentina\'s Legal Framework\n III. Peruvian Legal Framework\n IV. Analysis of the Scenarios in Argentina and Peru\n V. Conclusion: Protect the Best Interests of the Child by Improving the Quality of Decisions\n21. Reviewing Medical Decisions Concerning Infants within the Norwegian Healthcare System: A Public Law Approach\n I. Introduction – Overview of the Legislation Relating to Health\n II. The Competence to Decide on Behalf of the Minor Patient\n III. The Kristina and Ove Cases\n IV. Reflections\n22. Children and Medical Decision-Making in Australia Post-Gard: A Possible Reformulation\n I. Introduction\n II. Marion\'s Case\n III. The Problems of the Therapeutic/Non-Therapeutic Distinction\n IV. The Court as an Uber-Parent – A New Development\n V. Disputes between Parents, Doctors and the Courts – When Should the Court Act as a De Novo Decision-Maker?\n VI. Post-Gard and the \'Risk of Significant Harm\' Test in Australia\n VII. Judicial Review of Parental Decisions Regarding Therapeutic Treatments\n VIII. Conclusions\n23. Parental Authoritarianism and Medical Decision-Making in Thailand: The Need to Limit Parental Authority\n I. Introduction\n II. Medical Treatment of Children: Autonomy versus Parental Authoritarianism\n III. The Role of Medical Professionals and Judicial Intervention for Preserving the Best Interests of Children\n IV. Conclusion\n24. Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Critically Ill Minors in Greece\n I. Introduction\n II. The Regime of Parental Responsibility in Greek Family Law\n III. Parental Consent to Medical Acts in Greek Law\n IV. End-of-Life Decisions for Terminal Illnesses\n V. Beginning-of-Life Decisions on Behalf of Minors\n VI. Conclusion\n25. Making Decisions for Children in Healthcare and Medical Research: African Communal Responsibility or Individual Rights?\n I. Introduction\n II. Communal Responsibility versus Individual Rights in Children\'s Healthcare\n III. The Place and Value of Children in African Healthcare Contexts\n IV. Children in Healthcare and Medical Research: Some African Examples\n V. Decision-Making for Children in Healthcare\n VI. Conclusion\n26. The Relevance of Cultural Competence to Resolving Disputes in Relation to Medical Decisions for Children\n I. Introduction\n II. Best Interests is Culture Bound\n III. Definition of Culture\n IV. Is there a Common Morality\n V. Cultural Competence\n VI. Thinking Fast and Slow: Cognitive and Unconscious Biases\n VII. Uncertainty\n VIII. Approaches to Dispute Resolution\n IX. What Role Should the Courts Play?\n X. Conclusion\n27. Legal and Cultural Differences in Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Very Young Children\n I. Lack of Case-Law\n II. The Limits of Parental Authority\n III. How Does Best Interests Operate?\n IV. Cultural Competence\n V. Conclusion\nIndex