Subsequent Developments
The decisions in Re R and Re W (especially Lord Donaldson) contradict the Gillick decision somewhat. From these, and subsequent cases, it is suggested that although the parental right to veto treatment ends, parental powers do not ‘terminate’ as suggested by Lord Scarman in Gillick. However, these are only obiter statements and were made by a lower court; therefore, they are not legally binding. However, the parens patriae jurisdiction of the court remains available allowing a court order to force treatment against a child's (and parent’s) wishes.
A child who is deemed "Gillick competent" is able to prevent their parents viewing their medical records. As such, medical staff will not make a disclosure of medical records of a child who is deemed "Gillick competent" unless consent is manifest.
In most jurisdictions the parent of an emancipated minor does not have the ability to consent to therapy, regardless of the Gillick test. Typical positions of emancipation arise when the minor is married (R v D AC 778, 791) or in the military.
The nature of the standard remains uncertain. The courts have so far declined invitations to define rigidly "Gillick competence" and the individual doctor is free to make a decision, consulting peers if this may be helpful, as to whether that child is "Gillick competent".
Read more about this topic: Gillick Competence
Famous quotes containing the words subsequent and/or developments:
“And he smiled a kind of sickly smile, and curled up on the floor, And the subsequent proceedings interested him no more.”
—Francis Bret Harte (1836–1902)
“The developments in the North were those loosely embraced in the term modernization and included urbanization, industrialization, and mechanization. While those changes went forward apace, the antebellum South changed comparatively little, clinging to its rural, agricultural, labor-intensive economy and its traditional folk culture.”
—C. Vann Woodward (b. 1908)