Guide to children’s participation in decisions about their health  

Main provisions of international law

General principles

In 1989, with the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), a fundamental value underpinning children’s rights was put forward: the vision that children, defined as any person under the age of 18 years, must be agents in their own lives, in particular, through Article 12, which sets out the right of all children to be heard and taken seriously, in a manner consistent with their evolving capacities

The right granted by this article later became known as “children’s right to participation”. 

Through its General  Comment  No.12  (2009)  -  The  right  of  the  child  to  be  heard , the Committee on the Rights of the Child provides guidance on how to interpret children’s right to participate in different areas of life, including healthcare.

Article 12 of the UNCRC, or the right of all children to be heard and taken seriously as a general principle, is linked to the other general principles of the Convention (Such as the right to non-discrimination, the right to life, survival and development), and, in particular, is interdependent with primary consideration of the best interests of the child (article 3). It should therefore also be considered in the interpretation and implementation of all other rights. 

The UN Convention makes no distinction based on age or other characteristics: all children have the right to receive appropriate information and to express their views, and therefore to participate in the decision-making process, taking into account their best interests and what is necessary for their well-being and development. 

At the European level, the Council of Europe Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (Oviedo Convention, 1997) , lays down the general rule that an intervention in the health field may only be carried out after the person concerned has given free and informed consent to it, based on prior relevant information (article 5). An intervention on a child who cannot consent, according to law,requires the authorisation of their representative, usually a parent, but their opinion shall be taken into consideration as an increasingly determining factor in proportion to his or her age and degree of maturity and, as a general rule, an intervention can only be carried out if it is for the child’s direct benefit (article 6).

The Explanatory Report to the Convention specifies that:

  • situations should take account of the nature and seriousness of the intervention as well as the child's age and ability to understand, and that the child's opinion should increasingly carry more weight in the final decision. It states that in some cases, this could even lead to the conclusion that the consent of a child should be necessary, or at least sufficient for some interventions (paragraph 45).
  • In some very specific situations and under some very strict conditions in the context of medical research and the removal of regenerative tissue respectively, the rule of direct benefit of the person may be waived.” (Articles 17 and 20 of the Convention (paragraph 44)

Specific situations 

Additional international legal instruments deal with specific health situations or to particular groups of children and re-affirm and/or complement the principles laid down by the two conventions cited above.

 

 Children’s participation in biomedical research

Children’s participation in biomedical research, including clinical trials, is subject to additional safeguards. 

In particular, research cannot be carried out if a child explicitly objects to it. Even if the legal representatives provide their authorisation, a child’s refusal or the revocation of their acceptance cannot be overruled.
This is reflected at European level, in the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, concerning Biomedical Research (CETS No. 195) that stipulates that research must not be carried out if a person who is not able to consent to research objects to it:


 Genetic testing

The The Additional Protocol to the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, concerning Genetic Testing for Health Purposes (CETS No. 203) provides that “(w)here, according to law, a minor does not have the capacity to consent, a genetic test on this person shall be deferred until attainment of such capacity unless that delay would be detrimental to his or her health or well-being” (article 10). And in any case, “(w)here, according to law, a minor does not have the capacity to consent to a genetic test, that test may only be carried out with the authorisation of his or her representative or an authority or a person or body provided for by law. The opinion of the minor shall be taken into consideration as an increasingly determining factor in proportion to his or her age and degree of maturity” (article 12).


 Emergency situations

​In emergency situations, health professionals may be faced with a conflict of duties between their obligations to provide care and to seek the patient's consent. The law provides for conditions under which medical decisions may be taken without the authorisation of the child’s legal representative.

 Children with disabilities

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) reflects the right to child participation in Article 7.3 whereby “States Parties shall ensure that children with disabilities have the right to express their views freely on all matters affecting them, their views being given due weight in accordance with their age and maturity, on an equal basis with other children, and to be provided with disability and age-appropriate assistance to realize that right”.

Through its General comment No. 20 (2016) on the implementation of the rights of the child during adolescence, the Committee on the Rights of the Child, reaffirms the right to child participation in general by stressing that “adolescents with disabilities should, in addition, be provided with opportunities for supported decision-making in order to facilitate their active participation in all matters concerning them” (paragraph 32).

  Key points:

 Every child has the right to be informed and listened to before any health intervention.

 The weight given to the views of the child increases with age and maturity.

 Decisions should be taken in the best interests of the child.

 Medical research may not be carried out on a child if they explicitly object to it, even when the legal representatives have provided authorisation.

 Genetic testing on a child must in principle be deferred unless the deferral would be detrimental to their health.

 Children with disabilities enjoy this right on an equal basis with other children, and they must be supported to realize that right.