Substitute consent to health care

While no “bright line” test exists, a court will consider the physical, emotional and intellectual maturity of the child, the nature of the parent- child relationship, the lifestyle of the minor, and the nature of the medical condition for which treatment is being sought.18. [...] In A. M. v. Benes,20 Justice Sutherland re-affirmed the constitutional nature of the right and stated that “codification” of the law of consent could not diminish common law rights unless it meets the “tests” of the Charter: I want to stress the constitutional entrenchment because there are in the materials filed on behalf of the Attorney General repeated references to provisions of the Act said t [...] The goal of this legislation was to “balance fundamental common law principles of self-determination and the protection of the rights of patients deprived of the mental capacity to make health care decisions.”21 The legislative package was substantially amended in 1996 when the Consent to Treatment Act and the Advocacy Act were repealed, the Substitute Decisions Act was amended, and the Health Car [...] In this situation, the health care provider may have the option of seeking to have the Public Trustee appointed as the committee for both property and personal care for the person, but it is not necessarily apparent that the person’s incapacity is that extreme S and, in any event, the procedure is both time consuming and extremely intrusive, and the Public Trustee has no knowledge of the person’s [...] The Uniform Act in the United States does not codify the common law relating to consent, except that it provides that individuals are presumed to have the capacity to make health care decisions.3 In the United Kingdom, the common law is in the process of being codified,4 although it differs markedly from the law in Canada.