#marionscase — Public Fediverse posts

28. "[Barber] said for kids aged 14 to 16 years it's a grey area, as they need parental consent while those aged 16 to 18 should be able to consent."

This also isn't a matter of Barber's opinion. "He said ... those aged 16 to 18 should be able to consent" makes it sound like he's winging it: "Oh well, they should be able to consent, it's fine, she'll be right". That framing suggests his practice is endangering children left and right.

In reality, he's simply accurately — and perhaps even slightly conservatively — summarising Australian and Queensland law. People under 16 have to either get parental consent, or actively prove they're GILLICK competent [1]. People over 16 are assumed competent by default [2].

SECTION NOTES

[1] i.e., that they're competent to give informed consent according to the test stipulated in the UK House of Lords ruling GILLICK v WEST NORFOLK AND WISBECH AREA HEALTH AUTHORITY [1986] AC 112. http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1985/7.html

#GillickCompetence was incorporated into Australian law by SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND COMMUNITY SERVICES v JWB AND SMB (1992) 175 CLR 2018 (#MarionsCase). http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/1992/15.html

[2] https://www.legalaid.qld.gov.au/Find-legal-information/Personal-rights-and-safety/Health-and-medical/Medical-consent