The Problem
Having a genetic test for SADS can have huge implications for adolescents and how they choose to live their lives. A clinician must decide if a young person under the age of 18 years can make that decision. The case of Gillick laid down the principles that a child under the age of 18 years can be can be allowed to give consent for treatment, rather than their parents if the child ‘achieves a significant understanding and intelligence to enable him or her to understand fully what is proposed’ (Gillick v. West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority [1985] 3 All ER 402, HL). While this was the decision of a judge made in 1985 for a particular fact situation, what relevance does it have in the case of SADS when adolescents are faced with modifications to their lifestyle on the basis of information derived from a genetic test? How do clinicians apply the Gillick principle?

Patient-centred
This project will involve talking with clinicians and genetic counselors as to how they conceive of and apply the principles laid down in the Gillick case. It will provide some insight into whether the judgments made by clinicians are at odds with the requirements laid down by the courts, by focusing on the case of SADS.

Rooted in the real world
The principle source of the data will be the clinicians and genetic counselors who must work within the bounds of legal precedent yet make a decision that will affect the lives of young people.

Legal Analysis
From this research, conclusions can be drawn on the wider issue of the interaction between legal doctrine and practice, and assessing the influence of judicial decision making. It will also determine whether such principles are useful in assessing competence for genetic testing. This research will also that have implications for any policy recommendations about the use of a genetic test for SADS in the NHS.

For more information about this project contact Dr Jane Kaye