{"title":"平衡父母权利与儿童福利:在 TEGA ESABUNOR & ANOR 诉 TUNDE FAWEYA & ORS.聚焦。","authors":"H. Okunrobo, Olaitan O Olusegun","doi":"10.53982/alj.2024.1201.04-j","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Children have the right like other human beings, to enjoy the best attainable standard of health, which includes access to healthcare services. Yet there is no escaping the reality that because of children’s vulnerability and lack of capacity, parents have the responsibility to act on their behalf and must ensure to make these decisions in the child’s best interest. Hence, a refusal to give consent to lifesaving treatment for the child will not be authorised, even if such refusal is from the parents. In cases of this nature, it has become the norm in most jurisdictions for the State to subrogate parental rights in the best interest of the child, this was the posture of the Supreme Court in the case of Tega Esabunor & Anor v. Dr Tunde Faweya & Ors. [2019] 7 NWLR (Pt. 1671) 316 (SC). The paper through doctrinal analysis, reviews and discusses the best interests threshold as a basis for overriding parental rights in protecting the child’s wellbeing. It highlights the responsibilities of parents vis- a - viz the State in ensuring that the child’s interests are best achieved, irrespective of religious or socio-cultural factors. This notwithstanding, the paper asserts that to effectively apply the principle, there must be a well-established standard of practice that completely overrides parental authority to authorise and pay the medical bills of the child and for further issues that may arise between parents in cases of lack of consensus and proper guidelines for medical practitioners.","PeriodicalId":123596,"journal":{"name":"ABUAD Law Journal","volume":" 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"BALANCING PARENTAL RIGHTS AND CHILD WELFARE: THE BEST INTERESTS THRESHOLD IN HEALTHCARE DECISIONS IN TEGA ESABUNOR & ANOR v. TUNDE FAWEYA & ORS. IN FOCUS.\",\"authors\":\"H. Okunrobo, Olaitan O Olusegun\",\"doi\":\"10.53982/alj.2024.1201.04-j\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Children have the right like other human beings, to enjoy the best attainable standard of health, which includes access to healthcare services. Yet there is no escaping the reality that because of children’s vulnerability and lack of capacity, parents have the responsibility to act on their behalf and must ensure to make these decisions in the child’s best interest. Hence, a refusal to give consent to lifesaving treatment for the child will not be authorised, even if such refusal is from the parents. In cases of this nature, it has become the norm in most jurisdictions for the State to subrogate parental rights in the best interest of the child, this was the posture of the Supreme Court in the case of Tega Esabunor & Anor v. Dr Tunde Faweya & Ors. [2019] 7 NWLR (Pt. 1671) 316 (SC). The paper through doctrinal analysis, reviews and discusses the best interests threshold as a basis for overriding parental rights in protecting the child’s wellbeing. It highlights the responsibilities of parents vis- a - viz the State in ensuring that the child’s interests are best achieved, irrespective of religious or socio-cultural factors. This notwithstanding, the paper asserts that to effectively apply the principle, there must be a well-established standard of practice that completely overrides parental authority to authorise and pay the medical bills of the child and for further issues that may arise between parents in cases of lack of consensus and proper guidelines for medical practitioners.\",\"PeriodicalId\":123596,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ABUAD Law Journal\",\"volume\":\" 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ABUAD Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53982/alj.2024.1201.04-j\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ABUAD Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53982/alj.2024.1201.04-j","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
儿童与其他人一样,有权享有可达到的最佳健康标准,包括获得医疗保健服务。然而,一个无法回避的现实是,由于儿童的脆弱性和缺乏行为能力,父母有责任代表他们行事,并且必须确保在做出这些决定时符合儿童的最佳利益。因此,拒绝同意对儿童进行挽救生命的治疗不会得到授权,即使这种拒绝是由父母提出的。在这种性质的案件中,国家为了儿童的最大利益代位行使父母的权利已成为大多数司法管辖区的规范,这也是最高法院在 Tega Esabunor & Anor 诉 Tunde Faweya 博士及其他人 [2019] 7 NWLR v. Dr Tunde Faweya & Ors.[2019] 7 NWLR (Pt. 1671) 316 (SC)。本文通过理论分析,回顾并讨论了最大利益门槛,将其作为在保护儿童福祉方面优先于父母权利的依据。它强调了父母相对于国家在确保儿童利益得到最佳实现方面的责任,而不论宗教或社会文化因素如何。尽管如此,该文件仍主张,要有效适用该原则,必须有一个既定的实践标准,完全超越父母授权和支付儿童医疗费用的权力,以及在缺乏共识和适当的医疗从业人员准则的情况下,父母之间可能出现的其他问题。
BALANCING PARENTAL RIGHTS AND CHILD WELFARE: THE BEST INTERESTS THRESHOLD IN HEALTHCARE DECISIONS IN TEGA ESABUNOR & ANOR v. TUNDE FAWEYA & ORS. IN FOCUS.
Children have the right like other human beings, to enjoy the best attainable standard of health, which includes access to healthcare services. Yet there is no escaping the reality that because of children’s vulnerability and lack of capacity, parents have the responsibility to act on their behalf and must ensure to make these decisions in the child’s best interest. Hence, a refusal to give consent to lifesaving treatment for the child will not be authorised, even if such refusal is from the parents. In cases of this nature, it has become the norm in most jurisdictions for the State to subrogate parental rights in the best interest of the child, this was the posture of the Supreme Court in the case of Tega Esabunor & Anor v. Dr Tunde Faweya & Ors. [2019] 7 NWLR (Pt. 1671) 316 (SC). The paper through doctrinal analysis, reviews and discusses the best interests threshold as a basis for overriding parental rights in protecting the child’s wellbeing. It highlights the responsibilities of parents vis- a - viz the State in ensuring that the child’s interests are best achieved, irrespective of religious or socio-cultural factors. This notwithstanding, the paper asserts that to effectively apply the principle, there must be a well-established standard of practice that completely overrides parental authority to authorise and pay the medical bills of the child and for further issues that may arise between parents in cases of lack of consensus and proper guidelines for medical practitioners.