Schoeman F
J Med Philos. 1985 Feb;10(1):45-61. doi: 10.1093/jmp/10.1.45.
This paper argues that liberal tenets that justify intervention to promote the welfare of an incompetent do not suffice as a basis for analyzing parent-child relationships, and that this inadequacy is the basis for many of the problems that arise when thinking about the state's role in resolving family conflicts, particularly when monitoring parental discretion in medical decision-making on behalf of a child. The state may be limited by the best interest criterion when dealing with children, but parents are not. The state's relation with the child is formal while the parental relation is intimate, having its own goals and purposes. While the liberal canons insist on the incompetent one's best interest, parents are permitted to compromise the child's interest for ends related to these familial goals and purposes. Parents decisions should be supervened, in general, only if it can be shown that no responsible mode of thinking warrants such treatment of a child.
本文认为，那些为促进无行为能力者福祉而进行干预提供正当理由的自由主义原则，不足以作为分析亲子关系的基础，而这种不足正是思考国家在解决家庭冲突中所扮演角色（尤其是在监督父母代表孩子做出医疗决策时的自由裁量权）时出现诸多问题的根源。国家在对待儿童时可能会受到“最大利益标准”的限制，但父母则不受此限。国家与儿童的关系是形式上的，而父母与孩子的关系是亲密的，有着自身的目标和目的。虽然自由主义准则坚持要维护无行为能力者的最大利益，但父母被允许为了与这些家庭目标和目的相关的 ends 而损害孩子的利益。一般来说，只有当能证明没有任何负责任的思维模式支持对孩子进行这种对待时，父母的决定才应被推翻。 （注：原文中“ends”这个词在这里似乎表意不太明确，可能是某个特定语境下的术语，直接保留英文以便读者理解原文的完整意思。）
