Skip to main content

The Pediatric Patient as a Self-Individual and Decision-Maker

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Surgical Ethics

Abstract

The novelty of the pediatric patient as an active participant in the medical decision-making comes from the fact of considering him or her as a subject of rights and as an active citizen. This ethical and legal change regarding children’s rights is recent in the history of surgical ethics. The 1995 statement by the American Academy of Pediatrics highlighted the experience, perspective, and power of children (American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on Bioethics. Pediatrics 95:314–317, 1995) and, in 2016, recommended the participation in decision-making commensurate with their development providing assent to care whenever possible (Katz, Webb, AAP Committee on Bioethics. Pediatrics. 38:e20161485, 2016).

Besides these new paradigms, new studies on the decision-making process show that before the legal age of majority (in most countries at 18 years), the minor may be ready to make decisions in the same way as an adult; these decisions must be respected and taken seriously since the minor needs to be recognized with an active role in the surgeon-patient relationship.

A new concept has been developed in the health-care scenario: the mature minor. This is especially important in situations of surgical disease and issues related to his/her body and health in general, where the minor should hold a major role as a decision-maker in the process of what is going to be done about him or her. The dynamic medical decision ecosystem shows a multilateral process that is shared and discussed, where three major and relevant actors coexist and participate: the health team, the pediatric patient, and the parents. This new conception of the minor as a subject of rights means that he or she must be offered participation in a progressive way and according to the developed competence to make decisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Nitta K. Decision making. Encyclopedia Britannica. Available in https://www.britannica.com/topic/decision-making. Accessed January 12, 2018.

  2. Grootens-Wiegers P, Hein IM, van den Broek JM, et al. Medical decision-making in children and adolescents: developmental and neuroscientific aspects. BMD Pediatr. 2017;17:120–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kaplan RM, Frosch DL. Decision making in medicine and health care. Ann Rev Clin Psychol. 2005;1:525–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S. Shared decision making: the pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:780–1.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Friedman Ross L. Health care decisionmaking by children. Is it in their best interest? Hast Cent Rep. 1997;27:41–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Starfield B, Bergner M, Ensminger M, et al. Adolescent health status measurement: development of the Child Health and Illness Profile. Pediatrics. 1993;91:430–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. National Scientific Council on the Developing Child. Young children develop in an environment of relationships. Working paper no. 1. Http://www.developingchild.net. Accessed 2 Feb 2018.

  8. McCormick R. Les soins intensifs aux nouveau-nés handicapés. Etudes. 1982;49:493–502.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Eiser C. Children’s quality of life measures. Arch Dis Child. 1997;77:350–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Thompson HL, Reville MC, Price A, et al. The quality of life scale for children (QoL-C). J Child Serv. 2014;9:4–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx. Accessed 17 Jan 2018.

  12. Arnold R. Human dignity and minority protection. Some reflections on a theory of minority rights. In: Elósegui M, Hermida C, editors. Racial justice, policies and courts’ legal reasoning in Europe. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol. 60. Cham: Springer; 2017. p. 3–14.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Cicero. On invention (translation Hubbell HM). Loeb Classical Library 386. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1949.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kant I. Groundwork for the metaphysics of morals (Wood AW, editor and translator). New Haven: Yale University Press; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sulmasy DP. The varieties of human dignity: a logical and conceptual analysis. Med Heatlh Care Philos. 2013;16(4):937–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. McCabe MA. Involving children and adolescents in medical decision making: developmental and clinical considerations. J Ped Psychol. 1996;21:505–16.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Buchanan A. Mental capacity, legal competence and consent to treatment. J R Soc Med. 2004;97:415–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Baumgarten E. The concept of competence in medical ethics. J Med Ethics. 1980;6:180–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Duncan RE, Sawyer SM. Respecting adolescents’ autonomy as long as they may the right choice. J Adolesce Health. 2010;47:113–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. McDougall RJ, Notini L. Overriding parents’ medical decisions for their children: a systematic review of normative literature. J Med Ethics. 2014;40:448–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Friedman Ross L. Theory and practice of pediatric bioethics. Perspect Biol Med. 2015;58:267–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Griffith R. What is Gillick competence? Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2016;12:244–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kennedy I, Grubb A. Principles of medical law. Oxford: OUP; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gracia D, Jarabo Y, Martín N et al. Toma de decisiones en el paciente menor de edad. En: Gracia D, Júdez J (Ed.). Ética en la práctica clínica. Fundación Ciencia de la Salud. Madrid, 2004 (pp 127–160).

    Google Scholar 

Suggested Literature

  • American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on Bioethics. Informed consent, parental permission and assent in pediatric practice. Pediatrics. 1995;95:314–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz AL, Webb SA, AAP Committee on Bioethics. Informed consent in decision-making in pediatric practice. Pediatrics. 2016;138:e20161485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rosa Angelina Pace .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Pace, R.A., Ciruzzi, S., Ferreres, A.R. (2019). The Pediatric Patient as a Self-Individual and Decision-Maker. In: Ferreres, A. (eds) Surgical Ethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05964-4_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05964-4_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-05963-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-05964-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics