Children’s Competence to Consent
The question of children’s competence to give or refuse consent1 is of largely recent origin (see Chapter 9). Until the mid-sixties it was not clear that children were “persons” within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, which makes the Bill of Rights applicable to the states. Although there were several early-twentieth-century “children’s rights” cases decided by the United States Supreme Court,2 each of these could be construed as a vindication of parents’ liberty interest in childrearing as they saw fit (Melton, 1982). In none of the early cases was there a clear indication of minors’ possessing constitutionally protected fundamental liberties independent of their parents. Children were perceived as properly dependent upon their parents who possessed a “right of control” over them.3 Even though parents’ rights in this regard are limited by the fact that they are not “free … to make martyrs of their children,’4 this restriction emanated from the state’s interest in the socialization of children.5 Indeed, the Supreme Court had held that it “would hardly seem open to question” that the state could impinge on basic freedoms of minors (e.g., freedom of religion) in ways that would be clearly unconstitutional if the same restrictions were placed on adults.6 Given clear indications that both parents and the state as parens patriae 7 could exercise control over minors (see Chapter 9 for additional discussion), the question of the limits of children’s actual competence to make personal decisions was moot.
KeywordsSupra Note Parental Consent Probation Officer Juvenile Court Supreme Court Decision
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Arthur, L. G. Should children be as equal as people? North Dakota Law Review, 1968, 45, 204–221.Google Scholar
- Crouch, R. E. An essay on the critical and judicial receptions of Beyond the best interests of the child. Family Law Quarterly, 1979, 13, 49–103Google Scholar
- Feshbach, N. D., & Tremper, C. Attitudes of parents and adolescents toward decision making by minors. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, September 1981.Google Scholar
- Goldstein, J., Freud, A., & Solnit, A. J. Beyond the best interests of the child. New York: Free Press, 1973.Google Scholar
- Keith-Spiegel, P., & Maas, T. Consent to research: Are there developmental differences? Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, September 1981.Google Scholar
- Levine, M., & Levine, A. A social history of helping services: Court, clinic, school, and community. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1970.Google Scholar
- Melton, G. B. The psychologist’s role in juvenile and family law. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1978, 7, 189–192.Google Scholar
- Melton, G. B. Children’s concept of their rights. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1980, 9, 186 - 190.Google Scholar
- Mnookin, R. H. Child, family, and state: Problems and materials on children and the law. Boston: Little, Brown, 1978. (a)Google Scholar
- Saks, M. J. Jury verdicts: The role of group size and social decision rule. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1977.Google Scholar
- Slobogin, C. “Voluntary” hospitalization of children: A look at the Parham decision. Division of Child and Youth Services Newsletter, 1980, 3 (2), 3–4.Google Scholar
- Weithorn, L. A. Competency to render informed treatment decisions: A comparison of certain minors and adults. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1980.Google Scholar