Parental responsibility and removal of life sustaining treatment : Re Baby D
Data(s) |
2011
|
---|---|
Resumo |
The case of Re Baby D (No. 2) has been described as a “landmark decision” as to whether parents themselves can authorise medical staff to withdraw life-sustaining treatment from their child or are required to seek the permission of a court or tribunal. The reasons for the decision that the removal of an endotracheal tube from the airway of Baby D was to treat “a bodily malfunction or disease” and therefore could be authorised by the parents will be explored. |
Formato |
application/pdf |
Identificador | |
Publicador |
Lawbook Company/Thomson Reuters |
Relação |
http://eprints.qut.edu.au/48210/2/48210.pdf http://www.thomsonreuters.com.au/catalogue/ProductDetails.asp?ID=1209 Cooper, Donna M. (2011) Parental responsibility and removal of life sustaining treatment : Re Baby D. Queensland Lawyer, 31, pp. 162-164. |
Direitos |
Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters |
Fonte |
Faculty of Law; School of Law |
Palavras-Chave | #180113 Family Law #Removal of life sustaining treatment #parental authorisation #health law #family law #parental responsibility |
Tipo |
Journal Article |