In this book Aoife Daly argues that where courts decide children’s best interests (for example about parental contact) the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child's "right to be heard" is insufficient, and autonomy should instead be the focus. Global law and practice indicate that children are regularly denied due process rights in their own best interest proceedings and find their wishes easily overridden. It is argued that a children’s autonomy principle, respecting children’s wishes unless significant harm would likely result, would ensure greater support for children in proceedings, and greater obligations on adults to engage in transparent decision-making. This book is a call for a reconceptualisation of the status of children in a key area of children’s rights.

This book provides a comprehensive overview of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights as it relates to children. It includes detailed analysis of the Court's key decisions on children's rights, highlighting its achievements as well as offering informed critique of its ongoing weaknesses.

What should happen when doctors and parents disagree about what would be best for a child? When should courts become involved? Should life support be stopped against parents' wishes? The case of Charlie Gard, reached global attention in 2017. It led to widespread debate about the ethics of disagreements between doctors and parents, about the place of the law in such disputes, and about the variation in approach between different parts of the world. In this book, medical ethicists Dominic Wilkinson and Julian Savulescu critically examine the ethical questions at the heart of disputes about medical treatment for children. They use the Gard case as a springboard to a wider discussion about the rights of parents, the harms of treatment, and the vital issue of limited resources. They discuss other prominent UK and international cases of disagreement and conflict. From opposite sides of the debate Wilkinson and Savulescu provocatively outline the strongest arguments in favour of and against treatment. They analyse some of the distinctive and challenging features of treatment disputes in the 21st century and argue that disagreement about controversial ethical questions is both inevitable and desirable. They outline a series of lessons from the Gard case and propose a radical new 'dissensus' framework for future cases of disagreement. - This new book critically examines the core ethical questions at the heart of disputes about medical treatment for children. - The contents review prominent cases of disagreement from the UK and internationally and analyse some of the distinctive and challenging features around treatment disputes in the 21st century. - The book proposes a radical new framework for future cases of disagreement around the care of gravely ill people.

This study explores whether and how enshrining children's rights in national constitutions improves implementation and enforcement of those rights by comparing Danish, Finnish, Icelandic, Norwegian and Swedish law.

This book explores the importance of autonomy in family law. It argues that traditional understandings of autonomy are inappropriate in the family law context and instead recommends the use of relational autonomy. The book starts by explaining how autonomy has historically been understood, before exploring the problems with its use in family law. It then sets out the model of relational autonomy which, it will be argued, is more appropriate in this context. Finally, some examples of practical application are presented. The issues raised and theoretical discussion is relevant to any jurisdiction.

Following the implementation of the Human Rights Act 1998, awareness has increased that we live in a rights-based culture and that children constitute an important group of rights holders. Now in its third edition, Children's Rights and the Developing Law explores the way developing law and policies in England and Wales are simultaneously promoting and undermining the rights of children. It reflects on how far these developments take account of children's interests, using current research on children's needs as a template against which to assess their effectiveness and considering a broad range of topics, including medical law, education and youth justice. A critical approach is maintained throughout, particularly when assessing the extent to which the concept of children's rights is being acknowledged by the courts and policy makers and the degree to which the UK fulfils its obligations under, for example, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Whereas individual Member State governments of the European Union occasionally complain about judgments of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), especially when those judgments curtail that State's policy autonomy in a sensitive domain, the collectivity of the Member State governments have agreed in each treaty revision so far to confirm and extend the far-reaching powers which the ECJ possesses for enforcing EU law. The explanation of the paradox can only be that, deep down, the Member States of the EU remain convinced that an effective ECJ with strong enforcement powers is one of the salient features of EU law which have stood the test of time and feel no inclination to clip the wings of the ECJ for fear that this would affect the effectiveness of the European integration process. Nevertheless, the grumblings about single judgments, or about the consistency and direction of the ECJ in particular policy fields, have never ceased and indeed have become more audible in recent years. This book - now available in paperback - deals with the perception that the ECJ quite often does not leave sufficient autonomy to the Member States in developing their own legal and policy choices in areas where European and national competences overlap.