The medical treatment you receive is limited by the consent you have given. This means that you can accept a single procedure without having to accept a full treatment program if that is your wish. In Australia, parents and young people have the right to consent to the treatment of a young person. Please seek legal advice on your particular situation. For consent to be valid, the patient or consenting person must be sufficiently informed about: Physicians are required by law to obtain your informed consent as part of their duty of care by explaining: There is a presumption that adults are capable of making decisions about medical interventions, unless there is evidence that: that this is not the case. However, it is unlikely that children under the age of fourteen, people with illnesses such as dementia, mental illness or brain injury, people under the influence of alcohol or drugs or intellectual disabilities will be able to give consent. It is important to remember that you have the legal right to refuse medical treatment. The Supreme Court may annul the decision of the adult minor and/or his/her parents regarding medical treatment if they consider that the decision is not in the best interests of the child. Confidentiality can also be violated for legal reasons such as a subpoena or other legal requirements such as child protection.

This would only happen in very serious cases. As a general rule, you can accept your own medical treatment if you are 16 years of age or older. Under section 33(2) of the Guardianship Act 1987, a person is incapacitated if: If you discover in New South Wales that your doctor or naturopath has performed a medical procedure on you without your consent, they may be prosecuted against them for bodily harm or intrusion of the person by you. If you successfully sue your doctor, you may be entitled to damages in the form of financial compensation. Public and private hospitals may have their own policies regarding the age at which a child can give consent, regardless of their parents. You should inquire about the specific requirements of the hospitals or organizations where you work. The common law applies in Australian jurisdictions that have not enacted specific legislation regarding the issue of minors` consent to medical treatment. The common law position regarding the competence of a minor to consent to treatment was established by the decision of the English House of Lords in Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority [1986] AC 112, which was upheld by the High Court of Australia in Secretary, Department of Health and Community Services v JWB and SMB (Marion case) (1992) 175 CLR 218. In Gillick, it was found that a parent`s authority diminishes as their child becomes more and more competent.

Gillick demands that parental rights to decide on their child`s treatment end once a child under the age of 16 is able to fully understand the proposed medical treatment. Whether a particular child has the intelligence and understanding to give valid consent is a question of fact. Although Gillick believes that a minor who has a required level of understanding may consent to processing, this does not imply a corresponding right to object to treatment. Therefore, a teenager who is competent according to the principles established by Gillick will generally not be able to refuse life-saving treatment if his or her parents are willing to accept it. Role of the courtsIn Marion`s case, it was decided that the courts may exercise a general supervisory function to protect the best interests of the child. This guardianship jurisdiction allows the courts to overturn the decision of the parents (and/or their competent Gillick children) who refused treatment and to approve treatment based on the concept of “best interests”. In addition, the courts may decide disputes relating to the proposed medical treatment of a child when there are disputes between parents and children or involving parents, children and doctors. ConclusionIn general, once a child reaches the age of 18, he or she is considered a fully competent and autonomous individual. In Australia, however, there are common law provisions and principles that recognize the evolving competence of adolescents to make decisions about their own medical treatment.

Therefore, parents and their adolescent children in Canada have the same right to consent to the treatment of the child. In cases where the legal status of consent to treatment is unclear, or in a situation where the wishes of the parents, the child and the doctors are in conflict with each other, the jurisdiction of the guardianship court may be invoked to resolve confusions or disputes. The court then makes its decision on the basis of the best interests of the child. The 15-year-old asked her GP if everything she had said during the consultation was kept secret. The GP said she could not give an absolute guarantee, but that any information provided to her by a patient would generally remain confidential. The girl then told the GP that she had a 16-year-old boyfriend and would like to start taking oral contraceptives, insisting she didn`t want her parents to know she was sexually active and taking the pill. The family physician was unsure of his legal status to treat a patient without parental consent. Dr.

Sara Bird, director of forensic and advisory services at MDA National, told newsGP that consent is required for all aspects of treatment. “Sometimes people just think about consent for surgery,” Dr. Bird said. “By law, you must have consent for any procedure, which includes taking a medical history and performing a physical examination.” Who can agree? “All adult patients are considered capable of consenting to their own treatment,” said Dr. Bird. “Consent for medical treatment of patients under the age of 18 is generally given by parents or guardians in Australia.” According to Dr. Bird, parents are required to act in the best interests of the child or adolescent when giving consent. However, she said there are circumstances where patients under the age of 18 can consent to their own medical treatment.

Common law or legislation M. Bird said that the law can refer to the common law (based on previous decisions) or to legislation.