In Re R (A Minor) (Wardship: Consent to Treatment): CA 1992

A doctor may not operate without on a child the consent of the person apparently legally able to give consent: ‘It is trite that in general a doctor is not entitled to treat a patient without the consent of someone who is authorised to give that consent. If he does so, he will be liable in damages for trespass to the person and may be guilty of a criminal assault.’

Judges:

Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR

Citations:

[1992] Fam 11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedIn Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) CA 22-Sep-2000
Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The . .
No longer reflects the lawRe X (A Child) FD 29-Oct-2020
Limited transfusion against young adults wishes
The Court was asked whether a blood transfusion should be administered to a young woman who was almost, not quite, 16, against her profound religious beliefs. X is a Jehovah’s Witness. She has explained to me, in very powerful and moving words, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Health

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.211399