Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

When was gilick competence started ?

73 replies

questionsaboutConsent · 22/06/2021 15:30

What year?

And how precisely is it ‘tested’ for ?
Is it only something for before 18 years old?

At 18 what happens then if a parent tries to push something medical on their child? So they only get a say if the 18 year old lacks capacity and does that have to be formally established through court?

OP posts:
FixTheBone · 22/06/2021 22:18

Re: above - only if the 18 year old lacks capacity to make their own decision on the matter.

questionsaboutConsent · 22/06/2021 22:20

@ObviousNameChage

The thing is , we know that doctors have historically performed treatments,surgeries ,procedures etc without patients' (normally female) consent.

It's not that unlikely that they would have done so to a very young woman too, particularly if they had consent/pressure from the parents.

Regardless of the law , whatever happened to you was wrong and unacceptable at least morally. There is no excuse , unless you were dying, and even then it can be a bit iffy.

Yes from notes I can see multiple entries re parental pressure/insistence
OP posts:
questionsaboutConsent · 22/06/2021 22:22

@FixTheBone

Re: above - only if the 18 year old lacks capacity to make their own decision on the matter.
Well it seems to be that that was presumed

This is why I wondered about GC but that’s not relevant for an 18 year old

OP posts:

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

NiceGerbil · 22/06/2021 22:24

@ObviousNameChage

The thing is , we know that doctors have historically performed treatments,surgeries ,procedures etc without patients' (normally female) consent.

It's not that unlikely that they would have done so to a very young woman too, particularly if they had consent/pressure from the parents.

Regardless of the law , whatever happened to you was wrong and unacceptable at least morally. There is no excuse , unless you were dying, and even then it can be a bit iffy.

100% agree.
FixTheBone · 22/06/2021 22:25

@ObviousNameChage

The thing is , we know that doctors have historically performed treatments,surgeries ,procedures etc without patients' (normally female) consent.

It's not that unlikely that they would have done so to a very young woman too, particularly if they had consent/pressure from the parents.

Regardless of the law , whatever happened to you was wrong and unacceptable at least morally. There is no excuse , unless you were dying, and even then it can be a bit iffy.

I've had to re-read this about 4 times.

Has the OP messaged you personally?

There's an awful lot of assumptions in the quote above, which I'm not sure are borne out from what the OP has disclosed, or from anything I know or have witnessed through a career in medicine...

I'm sure there's some truth there, but "it's not unlikely that they would have done so to a very young woman" implies the majority of young females get assaulted / mistreated during most medical contacts is a bit strong don't you think?

OverByYer · 22/06/2021 22:26

DOLs has nothing to do with Gillick competency

questionsaboutConsent · 22/06/2021 22:27

I haven’t messaged anyone privately but what @ObviousNameChage wrote is very relevant to me

OP posts:
NiceGerbil · 22/06/2021 22:28

I agree with her 100%.

This was 20 years ago as well.

She has not implied what you say below at all.

"it's not unlikely that they would have done so to a very young woman" implies the majority of young females get assaulted / mistreated during most medical contacts is a bit strong don't you think'

I have zero idea why you came to that conclusion on reading it.

I can see you are feeling defensive on behalf of the medical profession but it won't help say things like that which anyone can see are not true.

ChilliHeeler · 22/06/2021 22:29

DoLS only applies in care home settings or hospital inpatient and the person is not able to leave freely i.e their Liberty is being deprived. Not relevant here really by the sounds of it.

NiceGerbil · 22/06/2021 22:29

I would also suggest it's not the right thread for this, fix.

questionsaboutConsent · 22/06/2021 22:34

I have a lot to look into I think 😞

OP posts:
FixTheBone · 22/06/2021 22:34

I just realised that you asked how Gillick Competence is assessed, may be better to answer how capacity is assessed, as it may be more relevant to your circumstances.

It may be obvious - i.e. unconscious, under an anaesthetic, or longstanding and irreversible i.e. vascular dementia.

but, It also is assessed for the specific decision you are making.

Can you understand the information that is given?
Can you retain that information long enough to process?
Process that information to make a decision.
Can you communicate that decision effectively?

I generally assess this just by talking to people, mostly they wont realise this is happening, and I generally do it automatically to an extent, but will take additional steps to simplify the information, repeat it, provide it in writing etc, give the person additional time to think if required and bring in family or carers if there are communication issues to help with the 4 tests above..

NiceGerbil · 22/06/2021 22:38

OP this post is about something that happened 20 years ago.

I can understand the urge to try to make sense of something like this.

I think that the post from obviousnamechange wrote is very unlikely to not be what happened, especially given the comments in the notes.

You are unlikely to ever find out the detail of how it went.

Have you any friends who are good at listening , sensible, and will take your story at face value?

If not, another route to working through it?

Is your mum still around, do you have a relationship with her? I'm assuming that this is not something you would get very far with, talking to anyone in the family?

You deserve to be really angry. Feel betrayed and let down. Tricked maybe. And in the end you deserve to come to terms with it. Because this stuff can eat you up. It can take a long time though.

ObviousNameChage · 22/06/2021 22:39

@questionsaboutConsent

I haven’t messaged anyone privately but what *@ObviousNameChage* wrote is very relevant to me
I'm really sorry it is. Thanks

Been there, done that. As I was 14, a lot of people will tell me it was all above board. The truth is there was no need for it . My mother just wanted it done for various fucked up reasons. It is what it is.

I am going to ask what are you looking for in this thread? Just confirmation they were in the wrong? Are you considering legal action? Something to prove to your parents they were wrong to do what they did?

I'm only asking, because regardless of the answers and the legalities of it all, you might not get the outcome you need/want and will possibly need an entirely different type of support/help like therapy.

OverByYer · 22/06/2021 22:43

I have no idea what is going on Confused

questionsaboutConsent · 22/06/2021 22:47

I think what I want is just to know and to understand what should have been in place to protect/safeguard me ?

I always believed at 18 you’re an adult - and make decisions about yourself. Have autonomy.
But I’ve been confronted by something that very clearly shows me I didn’t have that right and I’m quite shocked. I came across a thread mentioning GC and just wondered had that been relevant (but clearly now I’ve realised it’s not)

I’m just at the moment a little lost, trying to work things out and quite confused how my set of circumstances came to be and I hadn’t heard of GC before

OP posts:
LemonRoses · 22/06/2021 22:48

There’s some real confusion about guidance and law relating to consent.

Gillick competence is concerned with determining a child’s capacity to consent. Fraser guidelines, on the other hand, are used specifically to decide if a child can consent to contraceptive or sexual health advice and treatment.

n law, a person's 18th birthday draws the line between childhood and adulthood (Children Act 1989 s105) - so in health care matters, an 18 year old enjoys as much autonomy as any other adult. To a more limited extent, 16 and 17 year-olds can also take medical decisions independently of their parents. The right of younger children to provide independent consent is proportionate to their competence - a child's age alone is clearly an unreliable predictor of his or her competence to make decisions.

In 1983 the judgement from the Gillick case laid out criteria for establishing whether a child under has the capacity to provide consent to treatment; the so-called ‘Gillick test’. It was determined that children under 16 can consent if they have sufficient understanding and intelligence to fully understand what is involved in a proposed treatment, including its purpose, nature, likely effects and risks, chances of success and the availability of other options.

A child may have the capacity to consent to some treatments but not others. The understanding required for different interventions will vary, and capacity can also fluctuate such as in certain mental health conditions. Therefore each individual decision requires assessment of Gillick competence. Rarely agreements cannot be reached and decisions are referred to the Court of Protection.

The ‘Fraser guidelines’ specifically relate only to contraception and sexual health. They are named after one of the Lords responsible for the Gillick judgement but who went on to address the specific issue of giving contraceptive advice and treatment to those under 16 without parental consent.

Each professional carrying out assessment of ability of a child to consent must also ensure the consent is free of coercion and there are no safeguarding concerns.

Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards only apply to over sixteens and relates to the Mental Capacity Act (2005). They are about restricting the freedoms of someone who has lost capacity to make decisions for themselves. Things like stopping people leaving care homes, the use of bed rails in hospitals, strapping someone in an armchair, the use of padded boxing gloves or taking away someone’s car keys might all need a DoLS application to the local authority.

Consent by children is not subject to the MCA. Parts of the Mental Health Act do apply to children. Children can be detained under the MHA with the same protection as adults.

Sometimes parents are able to consent for children up to eighteen years of age - if they were unconscious, for example. If they have long term conditions that affect capacity then parents can continue to consent for much longer. Otherwise at eighteen the rules about consent come into full force and nobody can consent for another person unless they have deputyship. In some complex situations children’s withholding of consent is overruled, but usually by a court.

NiceGerbil · 22/06/2021 22:50

You might have got s different answer from a different doc.

There are loads of them.

As you were over 18, then you should have been given the full facts, options, risks etc and decided yourself.

Sadly in practice there's a long history of docs thinking they know best. And your doc agreed with your mum or was persuaded by her. And that was that.

Yubaba · 22/06/2021 22:50

DD is 14 and just had spinal surgery, when I was signing the paperwork the surgeon told us she had to sign it too and the surgery couldn’t go ahead without her consent, technically her surgery is classed as cosmetic even though I would argue it was essential and life changing.
Conversely my dad had a melanoma on his face and because of his Alzheimer’s the surgeon consented him himself because I took him to the appointment and I didn’t have POA so I wasn’t allowed to consent.

LemonRoses · 22/06/2021 22:52

Before the Gillick ruling parents automatically had the right to give consent for children up until the age of sixteen. After sixteen it was usually a shared consent process, but parents had the greater say.

lakesummer · 22/06/2021 22:52

I'm thinking that OP's parents gave consent for a medical procedure for OP when OP was a teenager.

OP is now wondering whether Gillick competence/Fraser guidelines should have meant she had more agency in the medical decision.

Legally it has been explained that usually aged 13 plus (roughly) teenagers are able to consent to medical procedures that they are thought to be able to give informed consent for.

These guidelines do not cover a teenager refusing to consent for a procedure if parents have given consent.

It is hard because a lot of emotional pressure can get caught up in some medical decisions such as abortions ( just as an example) I also think views on medical consent have moved in the last twenty years.

NiceGerbil · 22/06/2021 22:58

I think she said she was 18. When it happened.

LemonRoses · 22/06/2021 22:58

Actually, it was the Section 8 of Family Reform Act 1969, that changed the age to sixteen.
“The consent of a minor who has attained the age of sixteen years to any surgical, medical or dental treatment which, in the absence of consent, would constitute a trespass to his person, shall be as effective as it would be if he were of full age.”

lakesummer · 22/06/2021 23:00

Oh, okay.
If she had actually had her 18th birthday then she was legally an adult so Gillick competencies or Fraser guidelines aren't going to apply anymore.

questionsaboutConsent · 22/06/2021 23:00

@NiceGerbil

I think she said she was 18. When it happened.
Yes 18 so GC etc wouldn’t have applied
OP posts: