B4 Gillick and Fraser

Question 1

describe the background of the Gillick case

Answer 1

• English law requires that consent is needed before medical treatment can occur
• The Family Reform Act 1969 section 8 further added that ‘a minor who has attained the age of 16 years’ could provide consent on their own behalf
• in 1980, DHSS issued guidance on family planning to doctors that: ‘stated or implied that at least in certain cases which were described as ‘exceptional’, a doctor could lawfully prescribe contraception for a girl under 16 without her parents’ consent’

Question 2

what makes consent valid?

Answer 2

• voluntary
• informed
• given by someone with capacity
• for a specific intervention
• can be written, verbal or non-verbal

Question 3

someone is thought to have capacity to be able to make a decision if they can: ?

Answer 3

• understand info about the decision
• remember that info
• use that info to make a decision
• communicate their decision by talking, using sign language or any other means

Question 4

who was Victoria Gillick?

Answer 4

• mother of 10 that sought a declaration from the High Court that none of her daughters (all under 13) could be prescribed or advised on birth control until 16

Question 5

in the argument between Woolf and Gillick on the age of consent and contraceptive advice, who won?

Answer 5

• court ruled in favour of the original judgement by Woolf:
• ‘whether or not a child is capable of giving the necessary consent will depend on the child’s maturity and understanding and the nature of the consent required. The child must be capable of making a reasonable assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of the treatment proposed, so the consent, if given, can be properly and fairly described as true consent’

Question 6

what is the test of ‘Gillick competency’?

Answer 6

• what Lord Carman’s comments in his judgement of the Gillick case in the House of Lords are referred to as
• ‘it is not enough that she should understand the nature of the advice which is being given. she must also have a sufficient maturity to understand what is involved’

Question 7

what else did Lord Scarman comment on other than the Gillick case?

Answer 7

• he also commented more generally on parents’ vs children’s rights:
• ‘parental right yields to the child’s right to make his own decisions when he reaches as sufficient understanding and intelligence to be capable of making up his own mind on the matter requiring decision’

Question 8

what are the Fraser guidelines in general?

Answer 8

the guidelines state that contraceptive advice or treatment can be provided to a child under 16 without parental consent or knowledge provided that the healthcare professional is satisfied of certain criteria

Question 9

what criteria do the Fraser guidelines detail that a healthcare professional must be satisified of in order to provide an under 16 with contraception without parental consent or knowledge?

Answer 9

• the girl will understand their advice
• they cannot persuade her to inform her parents or allow them to inform the parents that she seeking contraceptive advice
• she is likely to begin or to continue having sexual intercourse with or without contraceptive treatment
• unless she receives contraceptive advice or treatment, her physical or mental health or both are likely to suffer
• her best interests require him to give her contraceptive advice, treatment or both without parental consent

Question 10

implications for pharmacy with Gillick and Fraser

Answer 10

• general supply of prescription medicines against prescriptions
• sale of pharmacy medicines
• specialist services such as EHC supply, screening and treatment for STIs