Have recently read ‘The Children Act’ by Ian McEwan and found it very absorbing as it took us into the work of a high court judge in the family division. It provided a behind the scenes view of how a legal decision is reached in the face of challenging moral dilemmas. The main focus of the story is the case of a seventeen-year-old boy from a family with strong religious beliefs, which the boy shares and which lead him, along with them, to refuse the blood transfusion that might save him.
It took me right back to the early 1960s when a film called ‘Life for Ruth’ went on general release (if you're under 60 I doubt you've heard of it, as apparently it was a box office flop, but with some good actors like Patrick McGoohan and Michael Craig). It was about a very similar issue and I went with a bunch of friends from secondary school to see it. The subject matter stayed with us for weeks and stimulated long discussions about the ethics of the situation. We were 12 going on 13.
It was to be over 25 years before the ‘Children Act 1989’ set in place safeguards to ensure the needs and welfare of the child were legally protected and separately represented. In ‘Life for Ruth’, the parents’ wishes took priority and the child’s right to survive was effectively ignored. At that time, if the parents disagreed, the father’s wishes took priority.
It took me right back to the early 1960s when a film called ‘Life for Ruth’ went on general release (if you're under 60 I doubt you've heard of it, as apparently it was a box office flop, but with some good actors like Patrick McGoohan and Michael Craig). It was about a very similar issue and I went with a bunch of friends from secondary school to see it. The subject matter stayed with us for weeks and stimulated long discussions about the ethics of the situation. We were 12 going on 13.
It was to be over 25 years before the ‘Children Act 1989’ set in place safeguards to ensure the needs and welfare of the child were legally protected and separately represented. In ‘Life for Ruth’, the parents’ wishes took priority and the child’s right to survive was effectively ignored. At that time, if the parents disagreed, the father’s wishes took priority.
RSS Feed
