Care of critically ill newborns: please do this short General Medical Council survey

I agree with Mrs Pickles, court as final arbiter where needed. The key principle has to be (in the Children's Act perhaps?) that an independent and neutral body needs to establish the rights and interests of the child, and these can't always be assumed to be the same as those of the parents. Or the medics.

I'm interested to see the support for the courts role. Personally I answered with parents as my choice. Everybody else has to live with what happens but the parents are living it and they should surely be given the right to have their view respected if the child themselves is unable to make their view known?

Done
x

Mrs Pickles - you have said 'because how can the GMC give guidance to take away the power to apply to court e.g. for the parents to injunct the hospital from taking an invasive course of action, or to keep the life support switched on. You can't take away that legal right by guidance'.

I don't think the GMC are trying to do that. They are writing guidance for doctors about what they should do/need to do in situations like this. They are seeking opinions from many interested parties to see what the popular opinion is across the board. And the GMC can't arbitrarily change legislation - eveything would have to be OK'd by the Government first - all the GMC could do would be to submit a paper/proposal and have it discussed and debated fully (AFAIK)

I agree that the courts should make the final decision in these cases. Not in every single case, but on occasions where the parents and the medical team arent able to agree between them the best way forward, then IMO the courts should act as the final arbiter.

So what you are saying is that the parents/Doctors should in most cases be able to make a collective and agreeable choice. No need for the courts to be involved in most cases.

BUT

If you take away the power for the courts to ever make a decision in these cases then the parents would never have the option to "appeal" against the doctors decision - for example.

Well, they can't take away legal rights but presumably they wish to test public opinion in order to make a case.

Not explaining myself very well[tired].

I agree in part MrsMeryHenry..I know medical is a huge part in the process,but as we know many medical people can be proved wrong re outcomes...it is also an emotional issue for parents and also,in part,for the nurses who are caring for the baby.

But surely the courst don't every make the actual decision (forgive my ignorance if I am wrong). They just give either the parents OR the doctors the authority to make that decision - if there is a dispute. I realise that they are effectively making the decision...but it is indirect via enforcing the decision that has already been made by one of the opposing parties.

Done. Very interesting to have to think these things through. I also agree with Doobydoo that the courts should not have the final say on the matter - this is a medical decision; no matter what the judges' proficiency in staying impartial may be, their expertise is simply not medical. I say this as somebody who is interested in becoming a magistrate one day.

Here is my suggestion, which I wrote in the questionnaire:

"I think the parents should have an automatic right to seek a second medical opinion. If the second medic and the infant's healthcare teams agree, then they should take the appropriate action. If not, they should take it to a higher, independent medical authority - it is odd and inappropriate that a medical decision should be made in a judicial context."

As someone who's well-acquainted (and now pretty comfortable) with death I understand how hard it is for a relative to make this decision on their own. At the same time there are times when we have to accept, however hard it is, that a person we love can no longer have a fulfilling and sustainable life. I wish I had accepted this earlier when my mother was ill; the medics kept telling us but we wouldn't believe it. Had we listened to them it would have her death less of a shock.

At the same time sometimes medics are wrong or only see the situation through their prisms, which is why I believe a second opinion (different prisms) is essential.

I am so thankful to have never been placed in this situation with a child, and god forbid that I ever am in future.

Oh.and have had to make decisions and all that.

I have filled in the questionnaire.I do not feel that courts should have the final say.

Obviously I'm not Vicky, but I can imagine that perhaps the point is to either say to doctors 'fine, the public supports you applying for court orders to contradict the wishes of the parents in hard cases' or 'you should think very carefully and only apply for court orders in the most extreme situations', maybe with a list of demanding criteria?

I have the impression (but may be wrong) that is much more common for doctors to apply for court orders than parents.

Done. After spending 3m as a member of the NICU family.

Done. Hope I never have to make such a decision.

Done, having spent months in SCBU with ds2 it is something I have thought about, but thankfully never had to make that painful decision.

I agree with edam... Fair or unfair is an odd choice of words, though I think I know what you mean. FWIW my view is that the courts should have the final decision.