Your Basket is currently empty

Your Bookshelf is empty!

Your Basket is currently empty


Parental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harms

Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children Post-Great Ormond Street Hospital v Gard

Editor(s): Imogen Goold, Jonathan Herring, Cressida Auckland
Media of Parental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harms
See larger image
Published: 28-11-2019
Format: PDF eBook (?)
Edition: 1st
Extent: 224
ISBN: 9781509924905
Imprint: Hart Publishing
RRP: £64.80
Online price : £58.32
Save £6.48 (10%)


Buying pre-order items

Your pre-order item will usually be shipped on the publishing date of the book.


You will receive an email with a download link for the ebook on the publication date.


You will not be charged for pre-ordered books until they are available to be shipped. Pre-ordered ebooks will not be charged for until they are available for download.

Amending or cancelling your order

For orders that have not been shipped you can usually make changes to pre-orders up to 24 hours before the publishing date.

This book is also available in other formats: View formats

Please note that ebooks are subject to tax and the final price may vary depending on your country of residence.

Delivery & Returns

Tell others about this product

Loren Epson

About Parental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harms

The question of whether and how decisions are made in respect of a child's medical treatment has become a matter of significant public controversy following the highly publicised cases of Charlie Gard (Great Ormond Street Hospital v Yates [2017]) and Alfie Evans (Alder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust v Evans et al [2018]). In light of this background, this timely collection brings together commentators from law, medical ethics and clinical medicine, actively drawing on the view from the clinic as well as philosophical, legal and sociological perspectives on the crucial question of who should decide about the fate of a child suffering from a serious illness. In particular, the collection looks at whether the current 'best interests' threshold is the appropriate boundary for legal intervention, or whether it is appropriate to adopt the 'risk of significant harm' approach proposed in Yates. Moreover, it explores the respective roles of parents, doctors and the courts and the possible risks of inappropriate state intrusion in parental decision-making, and how we might address them.

Bookmark and Share