Ethics of resuscitation for extremely premature infants: a systematic review of argument-based literature

ObjectiveTo present (1) the ethical concepts related to the debate on resuscitation of extremely premature infants (EPIs) as they are described in the ethical literature; and (2) the ethical arguments based on these concepts.DesignWe conducted a systematic review of the ethical literature. We selected articles based on the following predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria: (1) English language articles (2) presenting fully elaborated ethical arguments (3) on resuscitation (4) of EPIs, that is, infants born before 28 weeks of gestation.AnalysisAfter repeated reading of articles, we developed individual summaries, conceptual schemes and an overall conceptual scheme. Ethical arguments and concepts were identified and analysed.ResultsForty articles were included out of 4709 screened. Personhood, best interest, autonomy and justice were concepts grounding the various arguments. Regarding these concepts, included authors agreed that the best interest principle should guide resuscitation decisions, whereas justice seemed the least important concept. The arguments addressed two questions: Should we resuscitate EPIs? Who should decide? Included authors agreed that not all EPIs should be resuscitated but disagreed on what criteria should ground this decision. Overall, included authors agreed that both parents and physicians should contribute to the decision.ConclusionsThe included publications suggest that while the best interest is the main concept guiding resuscitation decisions, justice is the least important. The included authors also agree that both parents and physicians should be actively involved in resuscitation decisions for EPIs. However, our results suggest that parents’ decision should be over-ridden when in contrast with the EPI’s best interest.

Fungsionalisasi dan Implikasi Asas Kepentingan Terbaik Bagi Anak yang Berkonflik dengan Hukum: Studi Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Tanjung Karang

The principle of best interest for children requires sanctions of deprivation of liberty as a last resort. Therefore, the principle of the best interests of children must be considered in the resolution of cases of children in conflict with the law. This article, which focuses on the decision of the Tanjung Karang High Court, discusses the functionalization of the best interests principle for children in conflict with the law and the implications of their application. This article concludes, judges in deciding cases of children in conflict with the law in general have not considered the principle of the best interests of the child. Of the 22 cases of children in conflict with the law at the Tanjung Karang High Court, only three decisions that can be categorized have considered the principle of the best interests of the child. Of the three decisions, two were sentenced not prison and one sentenced to prison. The application of the best interest principle for children in conflict with the law can have both positive and negative implications. It has positive implications, especially for offenders, because it protects children’s rights and reduces the burden of court cases and correctional institutions. But it can also have negative implications, because it is feared not to provide a deterrent effect and invite negative public perceptions of the judiciary. Abstrak Asas kepentingan terbaik bagi anak menghendaki sanksi perampasan kemerdekaan sebagai upaya terakhir. Oleh karenanya, asas kepentingan terbaik bagi anak harus menjadi pertimbangan dalam penyelesaian perkara anak yang berkonflik dengan hukum. Artikel ini, yang berfokus pada putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Tanjung Karang, membahas fungsionalisasi asas kepentingan terbaik bagi anak yang berkonflik dengan hukum dan implikasi penerapannya. Artikel ini menyimpulkan, hakim dalam memutus perkara anak yang berkonflik dengan hukum pada umumnya belum mempertimbangkan asas kepentingan terbaik bagi anak. Dari 22 perkara anak yang berkonflik dengan hukum pada Pengadilan Tinggi Tanjung Karang, hanya tiga putusan yang dapat dikategorikan telah mempertimbangkan asas kepentingan terbaik bagi anak. Dari tiga putusan tersebut, dua divonis bukan penjara dan satu divonis penjara. Penerapan asas kepentingan terbaik bagi anak yang berkonflik dengan hukum bisa berimplikasi positif sekaligus negatif. Ia berimplikasi positif terutama bagi pembuat delik, karena melindungi hak-hak anak dan mengurangi beban perkara pengadilan dan lembaga pemasyarakatan. Namun ia juga bisa berimplikasi negatif, karena dikhawatirkan tidak memberikan efek jera dan mengundang persepsi negatif masyarakat terhadap lembaga peradilan.

International Parental Child Abduction In United States Of America And India

Intentional community concerns the issue of child parental abduction through its conventions. Total 100 countries across the world have recognized the Hague abduction convention in 2019. India is not a part of Hague Abduction Convention although Indian judiciary applying domestic personal laws and best interest principle in wrongful removal dispute in custody cases. This article gives analytical and explorative view on the issue of child abduction by parents from their habitual residence. Child abduction involves where one parent unilaterally takes the child back to his or her country in disturbed marital relationship. This article examines legal issue and problems in international parental child abduction and also throws light on International Abduction Bill. The Bill has been studied critically and analytically to suggest the recommendation. This article attempts to explain the existing statutory and judicial laws in India regarding parental abduction

Children’s Rights and the Juvenile Justice System in Estonia

Approaching from the UN Convention of the Right of the Child (UNCRC) and the principle of best interest of the child is mandatory in all decision-makings in all EU countries. However, we can see notable contradictions between the articles of UNCRC, the best interest principle and the practice of juvenile justice systems almost in every EU member state. International organisations and national states make efforts to cross the contradictions and to guarantee the rights stated in the UNCRC. In this paper, we present some attempts to enhance the juvenile justice systems while focusing on Estonian case. Participation in two international action research projects enables authors to give an overview about the situation how the rights of Estonian children in detention are followed and what are the main tendencies in everyday practice.

THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD PRINCIPLE AS AN INDEPENDENT SOURCE OF INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION

The Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the best interests principle codified in Article 3 in particular, is playing an increasingly significant role in decisions involving the admission or removal of a child from a host State. This article examines the extent to which the best interest principle may provide an independent source of international protection. That protection may, for instance, proscribe the removal of a child from a host State notwithstanding that the child is ineligible for protection as a refugee or protection under the more traditionalnon-refoulementobligations in international human rights law.

The Role of the Guardian in Determining the Best Interest of the Separated Child Seeking Asylum in Europe: A Comparative Analysis of Systems of Guardianship in Belgium, Ireland and the Netherlands

Separated children seeking asylum in Europe have the right to a representative, typically in the form of a guardian, and the right to have their best interests taken into account. These rights are articulated in the Council Directives and Regulations regulating the Common European Asylum System. The original language used around the time of developing the Common European Asylum System related to ‘harmonisation’. This article, therefore, looks at the level of harmonisation of the systems of guardianship, and the guardians’ responsibility to determine and promote the best interest, for separated children seeking asylum in Europe. The article begins by defining the guardian and the best interest principle and outlining the relevant law, which presently exists in Europe. Three case studies were chosen to provide current examples of the differences in practice in Europe, namely: Belgium, Ireland and the Netherlands. The question dealt with in this article is to what extent the three case study countries meet the minimum standards set out in European law in respect of guardianship and the best interests of separated children seeking asylum.

Implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989 in the Care and Protection of Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children: Findings from Empirical Research in England, Ireland and Sweden

This article presents the findings of socio-legal comparative research into the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989 (UNCRC 1989) in the care and protection of unaccompanied asylum seeking children (UASC) in England, Ireland and Sweden. This article begins by giving the background to the research and explaining the empirical methods used. The findings are reported in relation to one primary research question: what are the key barriers to implementation of the UNCRC 1989 in the care and protection of UASC in England, Ireland and Sweden. Analysis of the empirical data identifies three key barriers to implementation: indeterminacy of the best interest principle, ill-defined and implemented special protection and assistance measures, and lack of defined service objectives. The article concludes with recommendations for the further development of the implementation of the UNCRC 1989 in the care and protection of UASC in the three states and more generally.

Protecting the Best Interests of the Child: A Comparative Analysis of the Youth Justice Systems in Ireland, England and Scotland

In the Republic of Ireland the government has proposed amending the Irish Constitution in order to improve children's rights. In this article I will argue that the proposed amendment represents a serious diminution in the rights historically afforded to young people who offend, disregards Ireland's commitments under international law and also ignores the well established link between child maltreatment and youth offending. The Irish approach echoes developments in the English youth justice system where the welfare concerns of young people who offend have become marginalised. I will compare the Irish and English approaches with the Scottish youth justice system which looks beyond young people's offending behaviour and provides a multi-disciplinary assessment of the young person's welfare needs. I will conclude that in Ireland, and in England, the best interest principle must be applied fully, without any distinction and integrated in all law relevant to children including laws regulating anti-social and offending behaviour.