Involving parents in paediatric clinical ethics committee deliberations: a current controversy

David Archard, Emma Cave, Joe Brierley*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


In cases where the best interests of the child are disputed or finely balanced, Clinical Ethics Committees (CECs) can provide a valuable source of advice to clinicians and trusts on the pertinent ethical dimensions. Recent judicial cases have criticised the lack of formalised guidance and inconsistency in the involvement of parents in CEC deliberations. In Manchester University NHS FT v Verden [2022], Arbuthnot J set out important procedural guidance as to how parental involvement in CEC deliberations might be managed. She also confirmed substantive guidance on the role of parental views in determining the child's best interests. We agree that it is good practice to ensure that the patient voice is heard in ethics processes, but how that is achieved is controversial. Surely it is best that what matters most to a patient and their family, whether facts or values, is conveyed directly to those considering the moral issues involved, rather than via a prism of another party. The approach suggested in the Verden case has much in common with the process used by our CEC. In this article, we commend Arbuthnot J's approach, provide an example of its effective operation and consider what it might mean for ethics processes.

Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Medical Ethics
Early online date20 Sept 2022
Publication statusEarly online date - 20 Sept 2022


Dive into the research topics of 'Involving parents in paediatric clinical ethics committee deliberations: a current controversy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this