Woman fights for parents' right to know abortion advice to under 16s
http://www.100md.com
《英国医生杂志》
A mother of two teenage daughters went to the High Court in London last week to challenge government guidance allowing doctors to provide abortion advice or contraception to young people under 16 in England without the knowledge of their parents.
Judgment is pending in the judicial review case brought by Sue Axon, 51, a divorced single mother of five children from Manchester, over Department of Health guidelines issued last year that, she says, "undermine the role of parents."
The case has echoes of the controversy two decades ago when Victoria Gillick unsuccessfully claimed that parents should have to give their consent before underage girls could be prescribed the contraceptive pill. That case went all the way to Britain's highest court, the House of Lords.
Mrs Axon's argument is "much more modest," said her barrister, Philip Havers QC. "She merely says that as a matter of law she has the right to be notified. In shorthand, the case is about `the right to know.'"
Mr Havers told the court that Mrs Axon had had an abortion 20 years ago that caused her "guilt, shame, and depression for many years." She hoped that "neither of her daughters will have to undergo such an experience without at least their mother being present to guide and support them."
Sue Axon claims that parents have the right to be notified if doctors provide abortion advice or contraception to young people
Credit: MATTHEW FEARN/EMPICS
It emerged during the hearing that Mrs Axon's daughter Joy, 16, is pregnant and plans to carry the baby to term, although she became pregnant after Mrs Axon launched her case more than a year ago.
The current guidelines give teenagers under 16 the right to seek advice and treatment without needing to inform their parents as long as they are considered "competent" to take decisions about their own health.
Mrs Axon argues that the guidelines conflict with the House of Lords' ruling on the Gillick case in 1986. Although the law lords said it would be "most unusual" for a doctor to advise a child on contraception without the knowledge or consent of the parents, the current guidance makes it the exception rather than the rule to involve the parents, Mr Havers said.
Philip Sales, for the government, told Mr Justice Silber that a parental right to know would discourage young people from coming forward for advice and treatment.
Guidance in the 1980s—that it should be "most unusual" and "exceptional" to give contraceptive advice or treatment to someone under 16 without involving the parents—was neither appropriate in modern circumstances nor effective to achieve the government's objectives of reducing the number of teenage conceptions and improving sexual health, Mr Sales added.
The Family Planning Association, which intervened to make submissions in the case, told the court that the traditional belief that "parents know what is best for a child" was contrary to social changes over the past 20 years.(Clare Dyer, legal correspondent)
Judgment is pending in the judicial review case brought by Sue Axon, 51, a divorced single mother of five children from Manchester, over Department of Health guidelines issued last year that, she says, "undermine the role of parents."
The case has echoes of the controversy two decades ago when Victoria Gillick unsuccessfully claimed that parents should have to give their consent before underage girls could be prescribed the contraceptive pill. That case went all the way to Britain's highest court, the House of Lords.
Mrs Axon's argument is "much more modest," said her barrister, Philip Havers QC. "She merely says that as a matter of law she has the right to be notified. In shorthand, the case is about `the right to know.'"
Mr Havers told the court that Mrs Axon had had an abortion 20 years ago that caused her "guilt, shame, and depression for many years." She hoped that "neither of her daughters will have to undergo such an experience without at least their mother being present to guide and support them."
Sue Axon claims that parents have the right to be notified if doctors provide abortion advice or contraception to young people
Credit: MATTHEW FEARN/EMPICS
It emerged during the hearing that Mrs Axon's daughter Joy, 16, is pregnant and plans to carry the baby to term, although she became pregnant after Mrs Axon launched her case more than a year ago.
The current guidelines give teenagers under 16 the right to seek advice and treatment without needing to inform their parents as long as they are considered "competent" to take decisions about their own health.
Mrs Axon argues that the guidelines conflict with the House of Lords' ruling on the Gillick case in 1986. Although the law lords said it would be "most unusual" for a doctor to advise a child on contraception without the knowledge or consent of the parents, the current guidance makes it the exception rather than the rule to involve the parents, Mr Havers said.
Philip Sales, for the government, told Mr Justice Silber that a parental right to know would discourage young people from coming forward for advice and treatment.
Guidance in the 1980s—that it should be "most unusual" and "exceptional" to give contraceptive advice or treatment to someone under 16 without involving the parents—was neither appropriate in modern circumstances nor effective to achieve the government's objectives of reducing the number of teenage conceptions and improving sexual health, Mr Sales added.
The Family Planning Association, which intervened to make submissions in the case, told the court that the traditional belief that "parents know what is best for a child" was contrary to social changes over the past 20 years.(Clare Dyer, legal correspondent)