[Solved] NRP, medical records and my 9yr old son

Hi Jools 64

We will ask our legal experts over at the childrens Legal Centre to have a look at thsi and get back to you, we can't do this untill Monday sorry about that.

I think if you were married to the mum or have been named as dad on the birth certificate there are rights that you have BUT please don't take my word on that lets see what the CLC say next week

Hi Also just to say that i have deleted the thread under health so that things don't get complicated. Hope thats OK 🙂

Hi

I wanted to put it in the Health forum to gauge other people’s opinion on the matter because as the law stands it is open to misuse by the authorities. There is no clear age signifying Gillick competency as there is in Scotland which is 12yrs. My question though is, when do you deem a child to be Gillick Competent? The Judge on the 3rd Dec indicated that my eldest son (whose 12 at the time) was Gillick Competent and that he saw no need to involve my youngest (9 at the time) in court proceedings as he deemed him too young. Conversely I believe that my ex coerced my son into saying what he did say to the doctor without realising the effect it would have. I believe the Doctor was not aware of the full picture of my relationship with my ex and my son. I don't believe that a 9 year old would do things in a detrimental way to jeopardise our relationship. If that is the case then I would have been aware of that. But at the time, and still now, I see no reason why my son should deny me access to his medical records.

I have written to the doctor outlining my reasons for seeing the medical records, that primarily being that my son is with me at least 50 nights a year. As I have PR, what would the situation be should I need to take him to hospital in an emergency. Who would the doctors be looking to for information, my son or me, his father? To answer your question, my name is on his birth certificate.

Regards

HI I have contacted the CLC this morning and asked them to comment.

Hi Jools64

First of all it is important to determine whether or not you have parental responsibility for your son. You will automatically have parental responsibility if you were married to your child’s mother. Alternatively if you were not married to the child’s mother then you may have gained parental responsibility in one of the following ways:

• having his name registered or re-registered on the birth certificate if his name is not already on there after December 2003;
• making a parental responsibility agreement with the mother;
• obtaining a parental responsibility order from the court;

If you do have parental responsibility then you have a right to information relating to your son’s education and in some cases, your son’s medical records. However, this can be overridden if the medical professional feels that a child is Gillick competent.

If a child or young person with capacity requests that their parents are not told about medical matters the medical professional must respect confidentiality and not inform anyone else. Confidentiality may be breached if the medical professional justifies the breach on the grounds of child protection or if not telling parents would result in significant harm to the young person.

Young people under the age of 16 may have capacity to consent to medical treatment although they are not automatically deemed to have legal capacity; it is a decision for the medical professional to make and is dependent on the individual young person.

In the case you mention, Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Health Authority 1986, Judge Fraser clarified that capacity to consent is where a child has “…sufficient understanding and intelligence to enable him or her to understand fully what is proposed.”

There is no minimum age at which children can be regarded as competent to consent to medical treatment. However, it is unlikely that many children under the age of 13 would be deemed competent to consent without involving their parents.

Therefore it is possible that your son has been considered competent although this would be unusual at the age of 9 and may be worth writing a letter of complaint to the surgery at which your son’s GP works to see whether a second opinion can be sought.

If you do not feel that you receive the appropriate response from your complaint then you can complain to the NHS using their complaints procedure - http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Managingyourorg ... ure/DH_376 .

If you need any further advice in relation to this issue or any other issue of child law please do not hesitate to contact the Child Law Advice Line on 08088 020 008.

Kind regards

Children’s Legal Centre

As an update, I've written to the doctor and now a complaint to the Primary Care Trust wanting an explanation to why I've been denied access to my 9 year old son's medical records. As a reminder, my son comes and stays with me for 54 nights a year, I do have PR and my name is on his birth certificate. The letter to the Primary Care Trust has taken the following into consideration.

In the GMC Guidelines for 0 - 18, the practitioner has to get the views of the parents to ascertain what's in the best interest of the child. The practitioner did not do that. I've also slightly modified a statement from http://www.parentalalienation.org.uk/ where it defines Parental Alienation as "The systematic denigration of the non-resident parent by the resident parent with the intent of alienating children against the non-resident parent" which I believe my ex has done by coercing him prior to his 'prolonged conversation' with the doctor where the doctor deemed him Gillick competent. Further, due to my ex's acrimonious behaviour towards me I've sought to attend mediation, however, she has refused to attend. Food for thought for the doctor I think!

So I'll see what comes of that.

Hi Jools64,

I'm glad you're taking this further - I think it's shocking that a gp would find a 9 year old Gillick competent!

As for the parental alienation syndrome - be careful with that one. There is very little research on the syndrome and is not recognised yet in Court as a 'defineable' syndrome. Although I've heard it batted around alot lately.

Good luck with what you're doing, this could change things for non-resident parents across the country.