Children and consent to medical treatment

This chapter deals with the law concerning children and consent to medical treatment. Where a child under the age of 18 requires medical treatment, issues arise as to who may lawfully consent to the treatment and under what circumstances. Depending on the circumstances, consent may be given by the child’s parent or guardian; the child; or a court. The chapter provides a thorough treatment of Australian law about these issues and circumstances.

Surrogacy and IVF

While in the past surrogacy was illegal in Queensland, since June 2010 the Surrogacy Act 2010 (Qld) (“the Act”) has made altruistic surrogacy arrangements lawful in Queensland. In addition, it provides a mechanism for transfer of legal parentage from the surrogate to the person(s) wishing to have a child (the intended parent(s)). Commercial surrogacy – where a payment, reward or other material benefit of advantage (other than the reimbursement of the “birth mother’s surrogacy costs” (s11 of the Act) is made for entering into a surrogacy arrangement – remains unlawful. The paramount guiding principle underpinning the Act is that of the wellbeing and best interests of a child born as a result of surrogacy. The Surrogacy Act 2010 (Qld) allows a single person or a couple (heterosexual or same sex couples) to enter into an agreement with a woman, and her partner (if she has one), to become pregnant with the intention that the child will be relinquished to the intended parent(s). The Act also provides a mechanism for the intended parent(s) to be legally recognised as the parent(s) of the child. In order for the intended parent(s) to be legally recognised (via a parentage order, discussed below) it must be shown that the surrogacy arrangement was entered into when all the parties were over 25 years of age and the intended parent(s) are male or, in a heterosexual or lesbian couple the female(s) are not likely to conceive or give birth to a healthy child due to medical reasons. The arrangement must be entered into before the surrogate becomes pregnant and all parties must have obtained independent legal advice and counselling about the proposed arrangement, and evidence of this is required at the time a parentage order is applied for. For the purposes of the Act it does not matter how the surrogate conceives the child or if the child is genetically related to the parties. During the period of the pregnancy, the surrogate has the right to manage her pregnancy in the way she wishes. Although she cannot profit from acting as a surrogate, section 11 states that she is entitled to surrogacy costs. These include, for example, reasonable medical costs related to pregnancy and the birth of the child; counselling and legal costs associated with the surrogacy arrangement; actual lost earnings because of leave taken during pregnancy or following birth and any reasonable travel expenses incurred. The surrogacy arrangement itself is not legally enforceable; however, obligations to pay a surrogate’s surrogacy costs are enforceable unless she chooses not to relinquish the child to the intending parents. While the Act does not specifically deal with the situation where the surrogate decides she is unprepared to relinquish the child to the intended parents, there have been examples where parties have entered into these kinds of arrangements, and the arrangements have become difficult. For example, the Family Court case of Re Evelyn (1998) FLC 92–807 involved a child born to a surrogate mother who decided not to surrender her. The child was the genetic child of the surrogate mother and the husband of the couple who had contracted with the surrogate mother. Both sets of parents brought proceedings in the court, seeking that the child live with them. In hearing the application, the court applied the paramount principle of the ‘best interests of the child’. The court made clear that there is no presumption in favour of the birth mother, although in this case the court found that the child may be better placed with the surrogate mother’s family.

Continuing the critical analysis of 'meaningful relationships' in the context of the 'twin pillars'

This article continues the critical analysis of ‘meaningful relationships’ in the context of the operation of the ‘twin pillars’ which underpin the parenting provisions. It will be argued that the attitude of judicial officers to three key questions influence how they interpret this concept and consequently apply the best interest considerations. Relevant to this discussion is an examination of the Full Court’s approach to the key parenting sections, particularly the interaction of the primary and additional considerations. Against this backdrop, a current proposal to amend the ‘twin pillars’ will be examined.

Parental responsibility and removal of life sustaining treatment : Re Baby D

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.

Cyberinfrastructure inside out : definition and influences shaping its emergence, development, and implementation in the early 21st century

The authors provide a theoretically generative definition of cyberinfrastructure (CI) by drawing from existing definitions and literature in social sciences, law, and policy studies. They propose two models of domestic and international influencers on CI emergence, development, and implementation in the early 21st century. Based on its historical emergence and computational power, they argue that cyberinfrastructure is built on, and yet distinct from the current notion of the internet. The authors seek to answer two research questions: firstly, what is cyberinfrastructure? And secondly, what national and international influencers shape its emergence, development and implementation (in e-science) in the early 21st century? Additionally, consideration will be given to the implications of the proposed definition and models, and future directions on CI research in Internet studies will be suggested.

Australian laws and policies on child neglect

This chapter describes the features of different Australian State and Territory laws and policies about child neglect. It makes observations about three major domains of law and policy: laws about child neglect to enable protection of children who are suffering severe neglect (child protection laws); laws and policies about the provision of services for children and their families when experiencing neglect (support-oriented laws and policies); and criminal laws about child neglect.

Facebook, Twitter, SMS and YouTube : the ramifications and risks for surgeons

Social media revolution has impacted on how people interact with one another. This has been a worldwide phenomenon. Whilst social media had its genesis in the personal and private realm its use has expanded exponentially to professional and business contexts, as well as being adopted by governments, politicians, journalists – everyone in just about every walk of life. Although at first the uptake was slow, surgeons and other health professionals are now using social media in their professional as well as personal capacity. This comes with significant advantages and opportunities for improving surgical practice and for facilitating attending communication, but it also comes with certain risks, including legal liability. This paper outlines the ways in which social media including, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and SMS, is increasingly being employed in surgical practice and explains the legal and ethical consequences that may inadvertently arise in its official, as well as, unofficial use.

Surrogacy : competing interests or a tangled web?

Overseas commercial surrogacy is a legally challenging but commonly utilised form of assisted reproductive technology. Not only does it raise complex and competing policy issues, but it tests the relevant Family Law legislation which underpins parenting orders. Decisions handed down by the judiciary are inconsistent. Legislation is inadequate. But still the surge in surrogacy continues as surrogacy destinations such as India and Thailand continue to increase in popularity. Part one of this article addresses the competing interests of the illegality of overseas commercial surrogacy arrangements with the welfare of the child born as a result of such arrangements, and the inconsistent approaches taken by the judiciary. Part two concerns the interpretation of Family Law legislation by the courts in an attempt to provide intended couples and their children with certainty and finality, again resulting in inconsistent judicial decisions. Overseas commercial surrogacy is legally problematic, and intended parents need to be aware of its limitations.

1st International Workshop on Secure and Privacy-Aware Information Management in eHealth

Information security and privacy in the healthcare domain is a complex and challenging problem for computer scientists, social scientists, law experts and policy makers. Appropriate healthcare provision requires specialized knowledge, is information intensive and much patient information is of a particularly sensitive nature. Electronic health record systems provide opportunities for information sharing which may enhance healthcare services, for both individuals and populations. However, appropriate information management measures are essential for privacy preservation...

Women and ADR

Alternative dispute resolution, or ‘ADR’, is defined by the National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council as: … an umbrella term for processes, other than judicial determination, in which an impartial person assists those in a dispute to resolve the issues between them. ADR is commonly used as an abbreviation for alternative dispute resolution, but can also be used to mean assisted or appropriate dispute resolution. Some also use the term ADR to include approaches that enable parties to prevent or manage their own disputes without outside assistance. A broad range of ADR processes are used in legal practice contexts, including, for example, arbitration, conciliation, mediation, negotiation, conferencing, case appraisal and neutral evaluation. Hybrid processes are also used, such as med-arb in which the practitioner starts by using mediation, and then shifts to using arbitration. ADR processes generally fall into one of three general categories: facilitative, advisory or determinative. In a facilitative process, the ADR practitioner has the role of assisting the parties to reach a mutually agreeable outcome to the dispute by helping them to identify the issues in dispute, and to develop a range of options for resolving the dispute. Mediation and facilitated negotiation are examples of facilitative processes. ADR processes that are advisory involve the practitioner appraising the dispute, providing advice as to the facts of the dispute, the law and then, in some cases, articulating possible or appropriate outcomes and how they might be achieved. Case appraisal and neutral evaluation are examples of advisory processes. In a determinative ADR process, the practitioner evaluates the dispute (which may include the hearing of formal evidence from the parties) and makes a determination. Arbitration is an example of a determinative ADR process. The use of ADR processes has increased significantly in recent years. Indeed, in a range of contemporary legal contexts the use of an ADR process is now required before a party is able to file a matter in court. For example, Juliet Behrens discusses in Chapter 11 of this book how the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) now effectively mandates attendance at pre-filing family dispute resolution in parenting disputes. At the state level, in Queensland, for example, attendance at a conciliation conference can be required in anti-discrimination matters, and is encouraged in residential tenancy matters, and in personal injuries matters the parties must attend a preliminary compulsory conference. Certain ADR processes are used more commonly in the resolution of particular disputes. For example, in family law contexts, mediation and conciliation are generally used because they provide the parties with flexibility in terms of process and outcome while still ensuring that the negotiations occur in a positive, structured and facilitated framework. In commercial contexts, arbitration and neutral evaluation are often used because they can provide the parties with a determination of the dispute that is factually and legally principled, but which is also private and more timely than if the parties went to court. Women, as legal personalities and citizens of society, can find themselves involved in any sort of legal dispute, and therefore all forms of ADR are relevant to women. Perhaps most commonly, however, women come into contact with facilitative ADR processes. For example, through involvement in family law disputes women will encounter family dispute resolution processes, such as mediation. In this chapter, therefore, the focus is on facilitative ADR processes and, particularly, issues for women in terms of their participation in such processes. The aim of this chapter is to provide legal practitioners with an understanding of issues for women in ADR to inform your approach to representing women clients in such processes, and to guide you in preparing women clients for their participation in ADR. The chapter begins with a consideration of the ways in which facilitative ADR processes are positive for women participants. Next, some of the disadvantages for women in ADR are explored. Finally, the chapter offers ways in which legal practitioners can effectively prepare women clients for participation in ADR. Before embarking on a discussion of issues for women in ADR, it is important to acknowledge that women’s experiences in these dispute resolution environments, whilst often sharing commonalities, are diverse and informed by a range of factors specific to each individual woman; for example, her race or socio-economic background. This discussion, therefore, addresses some common issues for women in ADR that are fundamentally gender based. It must be noted, however, that providing advice to women clients about participating in ADR processes requires legal practitioners to have a very good understanding of the client as an individual, and her particular needs and interests. Some sources of diversity are discussed in Chapters 13, 14 and 15.

Equal shared parental responsibility and shared care post-return to Australia under the Hague Child Abduction Convention

This article explores the outcomes experienced by abducting primary carer mothers and their children post-return to Australia under the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.1 The circumstances faced by families that experience international parental child abduction are examined by considering how part VII of the Australian Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) is applied to resolve parenting disputes post-return. At present, the statutory criteria found in part VII encourage an equal shared parental responsibility and shared care parenting approach.2 This emphasis aligns children’s best interests with collaborative parenting3 and their parents living within close geographical proximity of each other to facilitate the practicalities of the approach.4 Arguably, these statutory criteria guide the exercise of judicial discretion to determine a child’s best interests towards a parenting arrangement that is incompatible with the lifestyle and functional characteristics of these families.

Re-examining habitual residence as the sole connecting factor in Hague Convention child abduction cases

This article critiques the usefulness of habitual residence as the sole connecting factor in Hague Convention child abduction cases. This is achieved by examining the quality of this jurisdiction in light of changes in the gender dynamics underpinning international parental child abduction and the transnational family phenomenon. Arguably, the child’s habitual residence as a home environment of the nature anticipated by the Convention’s drafters is an increasingly outdated construct. This is due to an increase in both the number of abducting primary-carer mothers, and their families’ growing mobility. Judicial determinations of habitual residence made during Conven- tion return proceedings are entrenched in the state-centric paradigm. This paradigm is becoming increasingly incompatible with the lives of families which experience international parental child abduction.

A study of outcomes post-return to Australia under the Hague Child Abduction Convention for abducting primary-carer mothers and their children

This article reports the findings of an empirical study of outcomes experienced by abducting primary-carer mothers and their children post-return to Australia under the Hague Child Abduction Convention. The study specifically focused on legal and factual outcomes post-return to Australia as the child's habitual residence. The study contributes an original critique of the Convention's operation by examining the collective operation of Convention return proceedings and Pt VII proceedings under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) post-return. Convention return proceedings, and the resolution of the substantive parenting dispute post-return to Australia, are not distinct stages operating in isolation. Viewing them as such is a purely theoretical exercise divorced from the reality of the lives of transnational families. Arguably, a better measure of the Convention's success is the outcomes it produces as part of the entire system designed to address the contemporary problem of international parental child abduction. When a child is returned to Australia this system includes the operation of Australian family law.