[troutman]

Originally Posted by FireFly

But it's not just the child, his parents agreed.

I think perhaps that's the most unfortunate part... if the parents would rather let him live 6 months than continue to have hope for a full recovery. However, I don't think you can force anyone to accept treatment if they don't want it. If that person is a child, then I would suggest their parents be the ones to make the final decision, however since the parents in this case sided with their child, who are the doctors to force it on him? And why would that even be an option?

"The best interests of children" over-rides everything.

http://www.rightsofchildren.ca/pdf/Background2.pdf

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/k2crc.htm

Article 3

• 1. In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.

• 
  2. States Parties undertake to ensure the child such protection and care as is necessary for his or her well-being, taking into account the rights and duties of his or her parents, legal guardians, or other individuals legally responsible for him or her, and, to this end, shall take all appropriate legislative and administrative measures.
• 
  3. States Parties shall ensure that the institutions, services and facilities responsible for the care or protection of children shall conform with the standards established by competent authorities, particularly in the areas of safety, health, in the number and suitability of their staff, as well as competent supervision.