Medical care neglect.

Discussed in sequence in this article are: the information which must pass from doctors to patients in the United States before a medical procedure is legally authorized, the necessity for comparable information to be provided to a judge who is being asked to order medical treatment for a child over objections by parents, the factors likely to influence a judge to order treatment over parental objections, and a process for deciding when the threshold for court intervention has been reached. While the general right of parents to be informed sufficiently and then to give consent for medical procedures, or to refuse to give consent, on behalf of their children is not in question, judges to override parental refusals to agree to care which is lifesaving or prevents severe impairment. An analysis of American law reveals that the factors likely to support court orders for treatment are: sufficient data has been provided for full, informed consent; a very severe prognosis exists if treatment is not provided, for example, death, retardation, paralysis, or blindness; delay is not a reasonable alternative; the medical procedure is not experimental and is likely to succeed; there are few contraindications; the quality of the child's life, given a successful intervention, will be at least of average "quality"; a child who is older consents to the procedure; and there is no strongly conflicting medical opinion. After a thorough discussion of medical factors with parents, court intervention should be considered if it is thought by those involved that no minimally reasonable parent would refuse to consent to treatment under the circumstances.