Opting only in: Contractarians, waiver of liability provisions, and the race to the bottom

This paper will test the core claim of scholars in the nexus of contracts tradition—that private ordering as a process of bargaining creates optimal rules. We do this by analyzing empirical evidence in the context of waiver of liability provisions. These provisions allow companies to eliminate monetary damages for breach of the duty of care through amendments to the articles of incorporation. With all states allowing some form of these provisions, they represent a good laboratory to examine the bargaining process between management and shareholders. The contractarian approach would suggest that shareholders negotiate with management to obtain agreements that are in their best interests. If a process of bargaining is at work as they claim, the opt-in process for waiver of liability provisions ought to generate a variety of approaches. Shareholders wanting a high degree of accountability would presumably not support a waiver of liability. In other instances, shareholders might favor them in order to attract or retain qualified managers. Still others would presumably want a mix, allowing waiver but only in specified circumstances.Our analysis reveals that the diversity predicted by a private ordering model is not borne out by the evidence with waiver of liability provisions for Fortune 100 companies. All states permit such provisions and in the Fortune 100, all but one company has them. Moreover, they are remarkably similar in effect, waiving liability to the fullest extent permitted by law. In other words, one categorical rule was merely replaced by another, dealing a significant blow to the contractarian thesis.

A prova ilícita na investigação de paternidade

A presente dissertação versa sobre a prova ilícita na investigação de paternidade, com a percepção que inexistem direitos e garantias absolutos. Sob esse ponto de vista, propõe-se a demonstrar que tanto o direito à prova quanto a garantia constitucional da inadmissibilidade da prova obtida por meios ilícitos são passíveis de sofrer restrições. Essas restrições, entretanto, não podem implicar na supressão de direitos e garantias fundamentais. Elas devem limitar-se ao estritamente necessário para a salvaguarda de outros direitos constitucionalmente protegidos, à luz de um juízo de ponderação entre os valores conflitantes. Os valores colidentes a serem analisados no presente trabalho são, por um lado, a proteção constitucional dispensada à intimidade, à vida privada, à imagem, à honra, ao sigilo da correspondência, às comunicações telegráficas, aos dados, às comunicações telefônicas e ao domicílio do suposto pai e, por outro, o direito do filho conhecer a sua origem genética e receber do genitor assistência material, educacional e psicológica, além da herança no caso de morte deste. Avultam-se, ainda, os comandos constitucionais da paternidade responsável (CF, o art. 226, § 7º) e da prioridade absoluta que a Constituição Federal confere às questões afetas à criança e ao adolescente. Nessa linha de perspectiva, procura conciliar o direito fundamental ao conhecimento da origem genética com a garantia constitucional que veda a obtenção da prova por meios ilícitos, reduzindo, quando necessário, o alcance de um desses valores contrastantes para que haja a preservação do outro e o restabelecimento do equilíbrio entre eles. Com o intuito de facilitar a compreensão do assunto, o estudo sobre a prova ilícita na investigação de paternidade encontra-se dividido em três capítulos. No primeiro capítulo são estudados o objeto da prova na investigação de paternidade, os fatos a provar, as teorias sobre o objeto da prova, o ônus da prova, a distribuição e a inversão do ônus da prova na investigação de paternidade, o momento da inversão do ônus da prova, o dever de colaboração e a realização do exame de DNA sem o consentimento das partes. Partindo da compreensão da prova como instrumento capaz de propiciar ao juiz o convencimento dos fatos pertinentes, relevantes e controvertidos deduzidos pelas partes como fundamento da ação ou da defesa, sustenta-se que os fatos a provar não são apenas os principais, mas, também, os acessórios que se situem na mesma cadeia deles. Desenvolve-se, outrossim, estudo sobre as teorias utilizadas pela doutrina para explicar o objeto da prova, a saber: a) a teoria clássica; b) a teoria da afirmação; c) a teoria mista. Nesse tópico, merece ênfase o fato das legislações brasileira e portuguesa estarem alicerçadas sob as bases da teoria clássica, em que pesem as divergências doutrinárias sobre o assunto. No item reservado ao ônus da prova, este é concebido como uma atividade e não como uma obrigação, diante da autonomia de vontade que a parte tem para comportar-se da maneira que melhor lhe aprouver para alcançar o resultado pretendido. Embora não traduza um dever jurídico demonstrar a veracidade dos fatos que ensejam a constituição do direito alegado, quem não consegue reunir a prova dos fatos que alega corre o risco de perder a demanda. No que tange à regra de distribuição do ônus da prova, recomenda-se a observação das disposições do art. 333 do CPC, segundo as quais incumbe ao autor comprovar o fato constitutivo do seu direito e ao réu a existência de fato impeditivo, modificativo ou extintivo do direito do autor. Argumenta-se que o CPC brasileiro adota o modelo estático de distribuição do ônus da prova, pois não leva em conta a menor ou maior dificuldade que cada parte tem para produzir a prova que lhe incumbe. Porém, ressalta-se o novo horizonte que se descortina no anteprojeto do novo CPC brasileiro que se encontra no Congresso Nacional, o qual sinaliza no sentido de acolher a distribuição dinâmica do ônus da prova. Esse novo modelo, contudo, não afasta aquele previsto no art. 333 do CPC, mas, sim, o aperfeiçoa ao atribuir o ônus a quem esteja em melhores condições de produzir a prova. Ao tratar do dever de colaboração, idealiza-se a busca descoberta da verdade como finalidade precípua do ordenamento jurídico. E, para se alcançar a justa composição da lide, compreende-se que as partes devem atuar de maneira escorreita, expondo os fatos conforme a verdade e cumprindo com exatidão os provimentos formais. Sob essa ótica, sustenta-se a possibilidade de inversão do ônus da prova, da aplicação da presunção legal de paternidade e até mesmo da condução coercitiva do suposto pai para a realização de exames, caso o mesmo a tanto se recuse ou crie, propositalmente, obstáculo capaz de tornar impossível a colheita da prova. Defende-se que a partir da concepção do nascituro, a autonomia de vontade dos pais fica restringida, de forma que a mãe não pode realizar o aborto e o pai não pode fazer pouco caso da existência do filho, recusando-se, injustificadamente, a submeter-se a exame de DNA e a dar-lhe assistência material, educacional e psicológica. É por essa razão que, em caráter excepcional, se enxerga a possibilidade de condução coercitiva do suposto pai para a coleta de material genético, a exemplo do que ocorre no ordenamento jurídico alemão (ZPO, § 372). Considera-se, outrossim, que a elucidação da paternidade, além de ajudar no diagnóstico, prevenção e tratamento de algumas doenças hereditárias, atende à exigência legal de impedir uniões incestuosas, constituídas entre parentes afins ou consanguíneos com a violação de impedimentos matrimoniais. Nesse contexto, a intangibilidade do corpo não é vista como óbice para a realização do exame de DNA, o qual pode ser feito mediante simples utilização de fios de cabelos com raiz, fragmentos de unhas, saliva e outros meios menos invasivos. O sacrifício a que se submete o suposto pai mostra-se, portanto, ínfimo se comparado com o interesse superior do investigante que se busca amparar. No segundo capítulo, estuda-se o direito fundamental à prova e suas limitações na investigação de paternidade, a prova vedada ou proibida, a distinção entre as provas ilegítima e ilícita, a manifestação e alcance da ilicitude, o tratamento dispensado à prova ilícita no Brasil, nos Estados Unidos da América e em alguns países do continente europeu, o efeito-à-distância das proibições de prova na investigação de paternidade e a ponderação de valores entre os interesses em conflito: prova ilícita x direito ao conhecimento da origem genética. Nesse contexto, o direito à prova é reconhecido como expressão do princípio geral de acesso ao Poder Judiciário e componente do devido processo legal, materializado por meio dos direitos de ação, de defesa e do contraditório. Compreende-se, entretanto, que o direito à prova não pode ser exercido a qualquer custo. Ele deve atender aos critérios de pertinência, relevância e idoneidade, podendo sofrer limitações nos casos expressamente previstos em lei. Constituem exemplos dessas restrições ao direito à prova a rejeição das provas consideradas supérfluas, irrelevantes, ilegítimas e ilícitas. A expressão “provas vedadas ou proibidas” é definida no trabalho como gênero das denominadas provas ilícita e ilegítima, servindo para designar as provas constituídas, obtidas, utilizadas ou valoradas com afronta a normas de direito material ou processual. A distinção que se faz entre a prova ilícita e a ilegítima leva em consideração a natureza da norma violada. Quando há violação a normas de caráter processual, sem afetar o núcleo essencial dos direitos fundamentais, considera-se a prova ilegítima; ao passo em que havendo infringência à norma de conteúdo material que afete o núcleo essencial do direito fundamental, a prova é tida como ilícita. Esta enseja o desentranhamento da prova dos autos, enquanto aquela demanda a declaração de nulidade do ato sem a observância da formalidade exigida. A vedação da prova ilícita, sob esse aspecto, funciona como garantia constitucional em favor do cidadão e contra arbítrios do poder público e dos particulares. Nessa ótica, o Direito brasileiro não apenas veda a prova obtida por meios ilícitos (CF, art. 5º, X, XI, XII e LVI; CPP, art. 157), como, também, prevê sanções penais e civis para aqueles que desobedeçam à proibição. A análise da prova ilícita é feita à luz de duas concepções doutrinárias, a saber: a) a restritiva - exige que a norma violada infrinja direito ou garantia fundamental; b) a ampla – compreende que a ilicitude afeta não apenas as normas que versem sobre os direitos e garantias fundamentais, mas todas as normas e princípios gerais do direito. A percepção que se tem à luz do art. 157 do CPP é que o ordenamento jurídico brasileiro adotou o conceito amplo de ilicitude, pois define como ilícitas as provas obtidas com violação a normas constitucionais ou legais, sem excluir àquelas de natureza processual nem exigir que o núcleo do direito fundamental seja atingido. Referido dispositivo tem sido alvo de críticas, pois a violação da lei processual pode não implicar na inadmissibilidade da prova e aconselhar o seu desentranhamento dos autos. A declaração de nulidade ou renovação do ato cuja formalidade tenha sido preterida pode ser suficiente para contornar o problema, sem a necessidade de exclusão da prova do processo. Noutra vertente, como a vedação da prova ilícita não pode ser levada às últimas consequências nem se converter em meio facilitador da prática de atos ilícitos e consagrador da impunidade, defende-se a sua admissão nos casos de estado de necessidade, legítima defesa, estrito cumprimento do dever legal e exercício regular de um direito. Assim, entende-se possível a utilização pela vítima de estupro, no processo de investigação de paternidade movido em prol do seu filho, do exame de DNA realizado mediante análise do sêmen deixado em sua vagina por ocasião do ato sexual que resultou na gravidez. Sustenta-se, ainda, a possibilidade de utilização das imagens captadas por circuito interno de câmaras comprobatórias do estupro para fazer prova da paternidade. Ressalta-se, outrossim, que no Brasil a doutrina e a jurisprudência têm admitido a prova ilícita, no processo penal, para comprovar a inocência do acusado e, em favor da vítima, nos casos de extorsão, concussão, sequestro e outros delitos similares. No ponto relativo ao efeito-àdistância das proibições de prova, aduz-se que as experiências americana e alemã da fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine e da fernwirkung são fonte de inspiração para as legislações de vários países. Por força da teoria dos frutos da árvore envenenada, o vício da planta transmite-se aos seus frutos. Ainda no segundo capítulo, estabelece-se breve comparação do tratamento conferido à prova ilícita nos ordenamentos jurídicos brasileiro e português, destacando-se que no regime de controle adotado pela Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil a prova ilícita é tratada como ineficaz e deve ser rejeitada de plano ou desentranhada do processo. Já na Constituição portuguesa adotou-se o regime de nulidade. Após o ingresso da prova ilícita no processo, o juiz declara a sua nulidade. O terceiro capítulo é dedicado ao estudo dos meios de prova e da incidência da ilicitude no processo de investigação de paternidade. Para tanto são eleitos os meios de prova enumerados no art. 212 do Código Civil, quais sejam: a) confissão; b) documento; c) testemunha; d) presunção; e) perícia, além do depoimento pessoal previsto no CPC, analisando a incidência da ilicitude em cada um deles. Má vontade a investigação de paternidade envolva direitos indisponíveis, isso não significa que as declarações das partes não tenham valor probatório, pois o juiz pode apreciá-las como elemento probatório (CC, art. 361º). Por meio do depoimento e confissão da parte são extraídas valiosas informações sobre o tempo, o lugar e a frequência das relações sexuais. Todavia, havendo emprego de métodos proibidos, tais como ameaça, coação, tortura, ofensa à integridade física ou moral, hipnose, utilização de meios cruéis, enganosos ou perturbação da capacidade de memória, a prova será considerada ilícita e não terá validade nem mesmo como elemento probatório a ser livremente apreciado pelo juiz. A prova documental é estudada como a mais vulnerável à incidência da ilicitude, pelo fato de poder expressar-se das mais variadas formas. Essa manifestação da ilicitude pode verificar-se por ocasião da formação da prova documental, no ato da sua obtenção ou no momento da sua exibição em juízo por meio falsificação material do documento público ou particular, da omissão de declaração deveria constar, inserção de declaração falsa ou diversa da que devia ser escrita, alteração de documento verdadeiro, emprego de métodos proibidos de prova para confecção do documento, etc. Na esteira desse raciocínio, em se fazendo constar, por exemplo, da escritura pública ou particular ou do testamento (CC, art. 1.609, II e III) declaração falsa da paternidade, a prova assim constituída é ilícita. Do mesmo modo, é considerada ilícita a prova obtida mediante indevida intromissão na vida privada, com violação de domicílio, emails, sigilos da correspondência, telefônico ou fiscal, realização de gravações, filmagens, etc. Na prova testemunhal entende-se como elemento configurador da ilicitude o emprego de métodos proibidos por parte de agentes públicos ou particulares, tais como tortura, coação, ameaça, chantagem, recursos que impliquem na diminuição ou supressão da capacidade de compreensão, etc, para que a testemunha faça afirmação falsa, negue ou cale a verdade dos fatos. Destaca-se, ainda, como ilícita a prova cujo acesso pela testemunha tenha ocorrido mediante violação à reserva da vida privada. No caso das presunções, vislumbra-se a possibilidade de incidência da ilicitude quando houver ilicitude no fato conhecido, do qual se vale a lei ou o julgador para extraírem as consequências para dedução da existência do fato desconhecido. A troca maliciosa de gametas é citada como meio ilícito de prova para alicerçar a presunção de paternidade no caso de inseminação artificial homóloga. A consecução da prévia autorização do marido, mediante coação, tortura, ameaça, hipnose, etc, na inseminação artificial heteróloga, também é tratada como ação danosa e capaz de viciar e infirmar a presunção legal de paternidade. Enxerga-se, outrossim, no meio de prova pericial, a possibilidade de maculação do resultado do exame por falha humana intencional no processo de coleta, transporte, armazenamento, manipulação ou troca do material genético coletado. Em se verificando essa situação, fica comprometida a credibilidade da prova pericial ante a sua ilicitude.

Pediatric donation after circulatory determination of death: Respecting the interests of children through routine consideration of donation opportunities

Overby and colleagues (2015) highlight the complexities of consent to or authorization for organ procurement in the setting of controlled donation after circulatory determination of death (cDCDD). They note that decision making about cDCDD is complicated by clinical uncertainties and ethical controversies regarding protocols for the determination of death by circulatory criteria and the use of perimortem interventions to support organ procurement, and that these uncertainties and controversies may be exacerbated in the pediatric context. Suggesting that parents and clinicians may “unconsciously” compromise the best interests of their own children and patients in order to achieve organ procurement goals, Overby and colleagues argue that children are at risk of instrumentalization when the option of cDCDD is presented. This claim is further grounded in their belief that children lack autonomy and can have no interest in becoming organ donors. In this commentary, we contest these assumptions, the implications of which extend beyond cDCDD and threaten to undermine programs of pediatric deceased donation, including donation after the neurologic determination of death (DNDD). We argue that routine consideration of the possibility of organ donation by critically ill children is consistent with respect for children’s best interests and, most importantly, their human dignity.

Optimal monitoring in family-owned companies? Evidence from Asia

Manuscript Type: Empirical Research Issue: We propose that high levels of monitoring are not always in the best interests of minority shareholders. In family-owned companies the optimal level of board monitoring required by minority shareholders is expected to be lower than that of other companies. This is because the relative benefits and costs of monitoring are different in family-owned companies. Research Findings: At moderate levels of board monitoring, we find concave relationships between board monitoring variables and firm performance for family-owned companies but not for other companies. The optimal level of board monitoring for our sample of Asian family-owned companies equates to board independence of 38%, separation of the Chairman and CEO positions and establishment of audit and remuneration committees. Additional testing shows that the optimal level of board monitoring is sensitive to the magnitude of the agency conflict between the family group and minority shareholders and the presence of substitute monitoring. Practitioner/Policy Implications: For policymakers, the results show that more monitoring is not always in the best interests of minority shareholders. Therefore, it may be inappropriate for regulators to advise all companies to follow the same set of corporate governance guidelines. However, our results also indicate that the board governance practices of family-owned companies are still well below the identified optimal levels. Keywords: Corporate Governance, Board Independence, Board of Directors, Family Firms, Monitoring.

Evaluation of contextual influences on the medication administration practice of paediatric nurses

Aim. This paper is a report of a study conducted to explore the impact of preidentified contextual themes (related to work environment and socialization) on nursing medication practice. Background. Medication administration is a complex aspect of paediatric nursing and an important component of day-to-day nursing practice. Many attempts are being made to improve patient safety, but many errors remain. Identifying and understanding factors that influence medication administration errors are of utmost importance. Method. A cross-sectional survey was conducted with a sample of 278 paediatric nurses from the emergency department, intensive care unit and medical and surgical wards of an Australian tertiary paediatric hospital in 2004. The response rate was 67%. Result. Contextual influences were important in determining how closely medication policy was followed. Completed questionnaires were returned by 185 nurses (67%). Younger nurses aged <34 years thought that their medication administration practice could be influenced by the person with whom they checked the drugs (P = 0·001), and that there were daily circumstances when it was acceptable not to adhere strictly to medication policy (P < 0·001), including choosing between following policy and acting in the best interests of the child (P = 0·002). Senior nurses agreed that senior staff dictate acceptable levels of medication policy adherence through role modelling (P = 0·01). Less experienced nurses reported greater confidence with computer literacy (P < 0·001). Conclusions. Organizations need to employ multidisciplinary education programmes to promote universal understanding of, and adherence to, medication policies. Skill mix should be closely monitored to ensure adequate support for new and junior staff.

Listening to late discovery adoption and donor offspring stories : adoption, ethics and implications for contemporary donor insemination practices

For most of the 20th Century a ‘closed’ system of adoption was practised throughout Australia and other modern Western societies. This ‘closed’ system was characterised by sealed records; amended birth certificates to conceal the adoption, and prohibited contact with all biological family. Despite claims that these measures protected these children from the taint of illegitimacy the central motivations were far more complex, involving a desire to protect couples from the stigma of infertility and to provide a socially acceptable family structure (Triseliotis, Feast, & Kyle, 2005; Marshall & McDonald, 2001). From the 1960s significant evidence began to emerge that many adopted children and adults were experiencing higher incidences of psychological difficulties, characterised by problems with psychological adjustment, building self-esteem and forming a secure personal identity. These difficulties became grouped under the term ‘genealogical bewilderment’. As a result, new policies and practices were introduced to try to place the best interests of the child at the forefront. These changes reflected new understandings of adoption; as not only an individual process but also as a social and relational process that continues throughout life. Secrecy and the withholding of birth information are now prohibited in the overwhelming majority of all domestic adoptions processed in Australia (Marshall & McDonald, 2001). One little known consequence of this ‘closed’ system of adoption was the significant number of children who were never told of their adoptive status. As a consequence, some have discovered or had this information disclosed to them, as adults. The first study that looked at the late discovery of genetic origins experiences was conducted by the Post Adoption Resource Centre in New South Wales in 1999. This report found that the participants in their study expressed feelings of disbelief, confusion, anger, sorrow and loss. Further, the majority of participants continued to struggle with issues arising from this intentional concealment of their genetic origins (Perl & Markham, 1999). A second and more recent study (Passmore, Feeney & Foulstone, 2007) looked at the issue of secrecy in adoptive families as part of a broader study of 144 adult adoptees. This study found that secrecy and/or lies or misinformation on the part of adoptive parents had negative effects on both personal identity and relationships with others. The authors noted that those adoptees who found out about their adoption as adults were ‘especially likely to feel a sense of betrayal’ (p.4). Over recent years, stories of secrecy and late discovery have also started to emerge from sperm donor conceived adults (Spencer, 2007; Turner & Coyle, 2000). Current research evidence shows that although a majority of couples during the donor assisted conception process indicate that they intend to tell the offspring about their origins, as many as two-thirds or more of couples continue to withhold this information from their children (Akker, 2006; Gottlieb, A. McWhinnie, 2001; Salter-Ling, Hunter, & Glover, 2001). Why do they keep this secret? Infertility involves a range of complex factors that are often left unresolved or poorly understood by those choosing insemination by donor as a form of family building (Schaffer, J. A., & Diamond, R., 1993). These factors may only impact after the child is born, when resemblance talk becomes most pronounced. Resemblance talk is an accepted form of public discourse and a social convention that legitimises the child as part of the family and is part of the process of constructing the child’s identity within the family. Couples tend to become focused on resemblance as this is where they feel most vulnerable, and the lack of resemblance to the parenting father may trigger his sense of loss (Becker, Butler, & Nachtigall, 2005).

Withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining medical treatment

• At common law, a competent adult can refuse life-sustaining medical treatment, either contemporaneously or through an advance directive which will operate at a later time when the adult’s capacity is lost. • Legislation in most Australian jurisdictions also provides for a competent adult to complete an advance directive that refuses life-sustaining medical treatment. • At common law, a court exercising its parens patriae jurisdiction can consent to, or authorise, the withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining medical treatment from an adult or child who lacks capacity if that is in the best interests of the person. A court may also declare that the withholding or withdrawal of treatment is lawful. • Guardianship legislation in most jurisdictions allows a substitute decision-maker, in an appropriate case, to refuse life-sustaining medical treatment for an adult who lacks capacity. • In terms of children, a parent may refuse life-sustaining medical treatment for his or her child if it is in the child’s best interests. • While a refusal of life-sustaining medical treatment by a competent child may be valid, this decision can be overturned by a court. • At common law and generally under guardianship statutes, demand for futile treatment need not be complied with by doctors.

Aboriginal public health and education : has it made a difference in practice?

Over the years, public health in relation to Australian Aboriginal people has involved many individuals and groups including health professionals, governments, politicians, special interest groups and corporate organisations. Since colonisation commenced until the1980s, public health relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people was not necessarily in the best interests of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, but rather in the interests of the non-Aboriginal population. The attention that was paid focussed more generally around the subject of reproduction and issues of prostitution, exploitation, abuse and venereal diseases (Kidd, 1997). Since the late 1980s there has been a shift in the broader public health agenda (see Baum, 1998) along with public health in relation to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (NHMRC, 2003). This has been coupled with increasing calls to develop appropriate tertiary curriculum and to educate, train, and employ more Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Aboriginal people in public health (Anderson et al., 2004; Genat, 2007; PHERP, 2008a, 2008b). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have been engaged in public health in ways in which they are in a position to influence the public health agenda (Anderson 2004; 2008; Anderson et al., 2004; NATSIHC, 2003). There have been numerous projects, programs and strategies that have sought to develop the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Public Health workforce (AHMAC, 2002; Oldenburg et al., 2005; SCATSIH, 2002). In recent times the Aboriginal community controlled health sector has joined forces with other peak bodies and governments to find solutions and strategies to improve the health outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (NACCHO & Oxfam, 2007). This case study chapter will not address these broader activities. Instead it will explore the activities and roles of staff within the Public Health and Research Unit (PHRU) at the Victorian Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation (VACCHO). It will focus on their experiences with education institutions, their work in public health and their thoughts on gaps and where improvements can be made in public health, research and education. What will be demonstrated is the diversity of education qualifications and experience. What will also be reflected is how people work within public health on a daily basis to enact change for equity in health and contribute to the improvement of future health outcomes of the Victorian Aboriginal community.

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.

Exploring ethical dilemmas for principals arising from role conflict with school counsellors

Acting in the best interests of students is central to the moral and ethical work of schools. Yet tensions can arise between principals and school counsellors as they work from at times opposing professional paradigms. In this article we report on principals’ and counsellors’ responses to scenarios covering confidentiality and the law, student/teacher relationships, student welfare and psychological testing of students. This discussion takes place against an examination of ethics, ethical dilemmas and professional codes of ethics. While there were a number of commonalities among principals and school counsellors that arose from their common belief in education as a moral venture, there were also some key differences among them. These differences centred on the principals’ focus on the school as a whole and counsellors’ focus on the welfare of the individual student. A series of recommendations is offered to assist principals to navigate ethical dilemmas such as those considered in this article.

Family law issues and schools : guidance for Australian educators

A substantial number of Australian children are now living in separated families, with many moving between their parents’ homes. This has led to educators being confronted with an increasing number of family law issues. This article discusses the key aspects of family law that involve children. It highlights the need for schools to be aware of all family law orders that relate to children in their care, including family court, domestic violence and child protection orders. It also provides guidance in relation to how schools can adopt child focused approaches in some common scenarios, where parents are in dispute. In particular, we will recommend that educators take a child-focused approach, consistent with the principal provision of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) that ‘the best interests of the child’ be the paramount consideration. We will highlight how this contrasts starkly with what can be described as a ‘parental rights’ interpretation, which has unfortunately been taken by some since the 2006 amendments to the Family Law Act, and is, in our view, directly at odds with the intention of the legislation.

How should Australia regulate voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide?

The purpose of this paper is to provide a basis from which to start an informed and rational dialogue in Australia about voluntary euthanasia (VE) and assisted suicide (AS). It does this by seeking to chart the broad landscape of issues that can be raised as relevant to how this conduct should be regulated by the law. It is not our purpose to persuade. Rather, we have attempted to address the issues as neutrally as possible and to canvass both sides of the argument in an even-handed manner. We hope that this exercise places the reader in a position to consider the question posed by this paper: How should Australia regulate voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide? In line with the approach taken in the paper, this question does not take sides in the debate. It simply asks how VE and AS should be regulated, acknowledging that both prohibition and legalisation of such conduct involve regulation. We begin by considering the wider legal framework that governs end of life decision-making. Decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment that result in a person’s death can be lawful. This could be because, for example, a competent adult refuses such treatment. Alternatively, stopping or not providing treatment can be lawful when it is no longer in a person’s best interests to receive it. The law also recognises that appropriate palliative care should not attract criminal responsibility. By contrast, VE and AS are unlawful in Australia and could lead to prosecution for crimes such as murder, manslaughter or aiding and abetting suicide. But this is not to say that such conduct does not occur in practice. Indeed, there is a body of evidence that VE and AS occur in Australia, despite them being unlawful. There have been repeated efforts to change the law in this country, mainly by the minor political parties. However, apart from a brief period when VE and AS was lawful in the Northern Territory, these attempts to reform the law have been unsuccessful. The position is different in a small but increasing number of jurisdictions overseas where such conduct is lawful. The most well known is the Netherlands but there are also statutory regimes that regulate VE and/or AS in Belgium and Luxembourg in Europe, and Oregon and Washington in the United States. A feature of these legislative models is that they incorporate review or oversight processes that enable the collection of data about how the law is being used. As a result, there is a significant body of evidence that is available for consideration to assess the operation of the law in these jurisdictions and some of this is considered briefly here. Assisting a suicide, if done for selfless motives, is also legal in Switzerland, and this has resulted in what has been referred to as ‘euthanasia tourism’. This model is also considered. The paper also identifies the major arguments in favour of, and against, legalisation of VE and AS. Arguments often advanced in favour of law reform include respect for autonomy, that public opinion favours reform, and that the current law is incoherent and discriminatory. Key arguments against legalising VE and AS point to the sanctity of life, concerns about the adequacy and effectiveness of safeguards, and a ‘slippery slope’ that will allow euthanasia to occur for minors or for adults where it is not voluntary. We have also attempted to step beyond these well trodden and often rehearsed cases ‘for and against’. To this end, we have identified some ethical values that might span both sides of the debate and perhaps be the subject of wider consensus. We then outline a framework for considering the issue of how Australia should regulate VE and AS. We begin by asking whether such conduct should be criminal acts (as they presently are). If VE and AS should continue to attract criminal responsibility, the next step is to enquire whether the law should punish such conduct more or less than is presently the case, or whether the law should stay the same. If a change is favoured as to how the criminal law punishes VE and AS, options considered include sentencing reform, creating context-specific offences or developing prosecutorial guidelines for how the criminal justice system deals with these issues. If VE and AS should not be criminal acts, then questions arise as to how and when they should be permitted and regulated. Possible elements of any reform model include: ensuring decision-making is competent and voluntary; ascertaining a person’s eligibility to utilise the regime, for example, whether it depends on him or her having a terminal illness or experiencing pain and suffering; and setting out processes for how any decision must be made and evidenced. Options to bring about decriminalisation include challenging the validity of laws that make VE and AS unlawful, recognising a defence to criminal prosecution, or creating a statutory framework to regulate the practice. We conclude the paper where we started: with a call for rational and informed consideration of a difficult and sensitive issue. How should Australia regulate voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide?

Workable solutions : the intersubjective careers of women with families

This chapter considers to what degree the careers of women with young families, both in and out of paid employment, are lived as contingent, intersubjective projects pursued across time and space, in the social condition of growing biographical possibilities and uneven social/ideological change. Their resolutions of competing priorities by engaging in various permutations of home-work and paid work are termed ‘workable solutions’, with an intentional play on the double sense of ‘work’ – firstly as labour, thus being able to perform work, whether paid or not; secondly as in being able to make things work or function in the family unit’s best interests, however defined.

Double standards in special medical research : questioning the discrepancy between requirements for medical research involving incompetent adults and medical research involving children

Medical research represents a substantial departure from conventional medical care. Medical care is patient-orientated, with decisions based on the best interests and/or wishes of the person receiving the care. In contrast, medical research is future-directed. Primarily it aims to contribute new knowledge about illness or disease, or new knowledge about interventions, such as drugs, that impact upon some human condition. Current State and Territory laws and research ethics guidelines in Australia relating to the review of medical research appropriately acknowledge that the functions of medical care and medical research differ. Prior to a medical research project commencing, the study must be reviewed and approved by a Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC). For medical research involving incompetent adults, some jurisdictions require an additional, independent safeguard by way of tribunal or court approval of medical research protocols. This extra review process reflects the uncertainty of medical research involvement, and the difficulties surrogate decision-makers of incompetent adults face in making decisions about others, and deliberating about the risks and benefits of research involvement. Parents of children also face the same difficulties when making decisions about their child’s research involvement. However, unlike the position concerning incompetent adults, there are no similar safeguards under Australian law in relation to the approval of medical research involving children. This column questions why this discrepancy exists with a view to generating further dialogue on the topic.

Health and guardianship law : the decision of X v the Sydney Children's Hospitals Network [2013] NSWCA 320 : mature minors and the refusal of blood products

This recent decision of the New South Wales Court of Appeal considers the scope of the parens patriae jurisdiction in cases where the jurisdiction is invoked for the protection of a Gillick competent minor. As outlined below, in certain circumstances the law recognises that mature minors are able to make their own decisions concerning medical treatment. However, there have been a number of Commonwealth decisions which have addressed the issue of whether mature minors are able to refuse medical procedures in circumstances where refusal will result in the minor dying. Ultimately, this case confirms that the minor does not necessarily have a right to make autonomous decisions; the minor’s right to exercise his or her autonomous decision only exists when such decision accords with what is deemed to be in his or her best interests.