What is it about?
This article considers how the landmark decision of Gillick v West Norfolk Area Health Authority (on consent of minors to medical treatment) applies in practice, revealing ambiguities and limitations.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
1) It articulates and analyses problems with Gillick competence, particularly when applied in clinical practice. 2) It considers how the worst effects might be alleviated if a case on treatment refusal were to come before the court. 3) In the longer term, it argues that legislation might incorporate minors within the MCA in conjunction with a new common law test for child incapacity
Perspectives
I was delighted to learn that the Law Commission, Mental Capacity and Deprivation of Liberty, No 372 (March 2017), Recommendation 6 states: 'The Government should consider reviewing mental capacity law relating to all children, with a view to statutory codification.' This is entirely in-keeping with the argument put forward in this article.
Professor Emma Cave
Durham University
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: GoodbyeGillick? Identifying and resolving problems with the concept of child competence, Legal Studies, March 2014, Cambridge University Press,
DOI: 10.1111/lest.12009.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
