Woolley's excellent article covers the subject well.
One area where the issue of consent arises fairly frequently is that of vaccination. Although the science is clear that (with a few exceptions for contraindications), vaccination according to the recommendations of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) and the "Green Book",[1] is generally in the child's best medical interests.
Some parents, however, have anti-vaccine views, and decline vaccination on behalf of their children. When all parties with parental responsibility (PR) are in agreement, this is not an issue. There have been cases, however, in which there has been a conflict. In two such cases, heard together by the appeal court,[2] the judgement was that vaccination with MMR was in the children's best interests and should proceed when the fathers (with PR) wished this, and the mothers did not.
The court, however, felt that the particulars of individual cases - including "the emotional effect on the mothers and the children, and on the bond between them" - should be considered in every case, so this cannot be taken as
carte blanche to act in what we perceive to be a child's best interests and vaccinate them if there is a disagreement with the people or bodies with PR for the child.
1. Department of Health, Welsh Office, Scottish Office Department of Health, DHSS (Northern Ireland). Immunisation against infectious disease. London: Department of Health, 2006 (and as amended) (http://www.publications.doh.gov.uk/greenbook/).
2. English R. RE B (A CHILD) sub nom IN RE VACCINATION/MMR LITIGATION : A v B : D v E sub nom IN RE C (A CHILD) (IMMUNISATION: PARENTAL RIGHTS) : IN RE F (A CHILD) (IMMUNISATION: PARENTAL RIGHTS) (2003) [2003] EWCA Civ 1148. 2003; Updated July 2003; Accessed: 2009 (18 November): Recent Cases (http://www.1cor.com/1198/?form_1155.replyids=277).
Conflict of Interest:
None declared
Some parents, however, have anti-vaccine views, and decline vaccination on behalf of their children. When all parties with parental responsibility (PR) are in agreement, this is not an issue. There have been cases, however, in which there has been a conflict. In two such cases, heard together by the appeal court,[2] the judgement was that vaccination with MMR was in the children's best interests and should proceed when the fathers (with PR) wished this, and the mothers did not.
The court, however, felt that the particulars of individual cases - including "the emotional effect on the mothers and the children, and on the bond between them" - should be considered in every case, so this cannot be taken as carte blanche to act in what we perceive to be a child's best interests and vaccinate them if there is a disagreement with the people or bodies with PR for the child.
1. Department of Health, Welsh Office, Scottish Office Department of Health, DHSS (Northern Ireland). Immunisation against infectious disease. London: Department of Health, 2006 (and as amended) (http://www.publications.doh.gov.uk/greenbook/).
2. English R. RE B (A CHILD) sub nom IN RE VACCINATION/MMR LITIGATION : A v B : D v E sub nom IN RE C (A CHILD) (IMMUNISATION: PARENTAL RIGHTS) : IN RE F (A CHILD) (IMMUNISATION: PARENTAL RIGHTS) (2003) [2003] EWCA Civ 1148. 2003; Updated July 2003; Accessed: 2009 (18 November): Recent Cases (http://www.1cor.com/1198/?form_1155.replyids=277).
Conflict of Interest:
None declared