The Student Room Group

Gillick competency vs Fraser guidelines

What's the difference between Gillick competence and the Fraser guidelines? Thank you!! 😊
They are often used interchangeably, although that's not really correct if you require a detailed understanding of the case.

Gillick competence describes the principle laid down by Lord Scarman in Gillick v. West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority [1985]: "the parental right to determine whether or not their minor child below the age of sixteen will have medical treatment terminates if and when the child achieves sufficient understanding and intelligence to understand fully what is propose". It is a general principle that refers to

In the same case, Lord Fraser described a specific test that should be met for the provision of contraception to patients under 16. Strictly speaking, his judgement only applies to contraception but it is often used more broadly to enrich/complicate the general principle enunciated by Lord Scarman:

1. the young person will understand the professional's advice;
2. the young person cannot be persuaded to inform their parents;
3. the young person is likely to begin, or to continue having, sexual intercourse with or without contraceptive treatment;
4. unless the young person receives contraceptive treatment, their physical or mental health, or both, are likely to suffer;
5. the young person's best interests require them to receive contraceptive advice or treatment with or without parental consent.

Law/ethics teachers don't get this right and, for the most part, it doesn't really matter. Although it might be good practice to employ some of the Fraser guidelines when dealing with children under 16 (e.g. encouraging them to inform their parents), these are not required outside the context of contraception.

This is a good article: http://www.bmj.com/content/332/7545/807

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending