Abstract
General practitioners must be capable of regularly taking 'ultimate' responsibility for difficult decisions in situations of clinical complexity and uncertainty. The Sexual Offences Act 2003 criminalises all sexual activity with a child under the age of 16. However, those who act with the purpose of protecting a child from a sexually transmitted infection, protecting the physical safety of a child, preventing the child from becoming pregnant or promoting the child's emotional well-being by the giving of advice will not commit an offence. Medicolegal academic writers have compared the legal separation of intention and foreseeability with the special defence of double-effect used in the palliative care context. This paper seeks to draw upon legal principles in constructing an ethical framework for analysis of this issue. It is hoped that this case study will stimulate further discussion, clarify the moral reasoning underpinning the existing guidelines for GPs and how the doctrine or principle of double effect can be used outside the palliative medicine context.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
