Parental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harms: Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children Post-Great Ormond Street Hospital v Gard 9781509924899

Варианты приобретения

Цена: 12672.00р.
Кол-во:
Наличие: Поставка под заказ. Есть в наличии на складе поставщика.
Склад Америка: Есть
При оформлении заказа до:
Ориентировочная дата поставки:
При условии наличия книги у поставщика.

Добавить в корзину

в Мои желания

Автор: Imogen Goold, Jonathan Herring, Cressida Auckland
Название: Parental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harms: Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children Post-Great Ormond Street Hospital v Gard
ISBN: 9781509924899
Издательство: Bloomsbury Academic
Классификация:

Семейное право: дети

Медицинское право и законодательство о медицинском обслуживании

ISBN-10: 1509924892
Обложка/Формат: Hardback
Страницы: 256
Вес: 0.54 кг.
Дата издания: 28.11.2019
Серия: Law & Criminology
Язык: English
Размер: 294 x 230 x 18
Читательская аудитория: Tertiary education (us: college)
Ключевые слова: Family law: children,Medical & healthcare law, LAW / Health,LAW / Family Law / Children
Подзаголовок: Medical decision-making on behalf of children post-great ormond street hospital v yates
Рейтинг:
Поставляется из: Англии
Описание: The question of whether and how decisions are made in respect of a childs 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 Childrens 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.

Parental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harms: Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children Post-Great Ormond Street Hospital v Gard, Imogen Goold, Jonathan Herring, Cressida Auckland