Investigación científica en el campo de la infancia: consideraciones sobre la aplicabilidad de los requisitos éticos / Scientific research study on childhood: considerations on the applicability of ethical requirements / Pesquisa científica no campo da infância: considerações sobre a aplicabilidade dos requisitos éticos

El artículo aborda un tema particularmente sensible para la investigación científica como lo son los estudios que involucran directamente a niños y niñas. El valor social y la relevancia científica de la investigación en este campo es indudable, sin embargo, su justificación requiere especial detenimiento en las condiciones para el ejercicio de sus derechos antes, durante y después del proceso de investigación. La naturalización de su denominación como "población vulnerable" y el ejercicio de su autonomía relativa, son dos dimensiones principales aquí. El artículo navega por preguntas que no se resuelven aquí precisamente, ¿qué garantías para el proceso efectivo de asentimiento informado?, ¿cómo acompañar en la toma de decisiones sin sustituir al niño y la niña? Sin embargo, sí avanza en la instalación de dilemas y aspectos conceptuales y reflexivos sustantivos en la práctica científica.

The article deals with a particularly sensitive topic for scientific research, such as research studies that directly involve boys and girls. The social value and scientific relevance of research in this field is unquestionable; however, its justification requires special care regarding the conditions of children's rights before, during and after the research process. The naturalization of their denomination as a "vulnerable population" and the exercise of their relative autonomy are the two main dimensions of this study. This paper explores questions that are not answered in it precisely: what guarantees informed consent during the effective process? How to accompany the decision making process without replacing the boy and the girl? However, the study makes progress regarding the setting of substantive conceptual and reflective dilemmas and aspects in scientific practice.

O artigo trata de um tema particularmente sensível para a pesquisa científica, os estudos que envolvem diretamente meninos e meninas. O valor social e a relevância científica da pesquisa neste campo é inquestionável, porém, sua justificativa requer cuidados especiais nas condições de exercício dos direitos da criancas, durante e após o processo de pesquisa. A naturalização de sua denominação como "população vulnerável" e o exercício de sua autonomia relativa são as duas dimensões principais deste paper. O artigo explora por questões que não são aqui resolvidas de forma precisa: quais sao as garantias para o processo efetivo de assentimento informado? Como acompanhar o proceso da tomada de decisões sem substituir o menino e a menina? No entanto, realizamos um avanço na instalação de dilemas e aspectos conceituais e reflexivos substantivos na prática científica.

El consentimiento informado en el menor maduro: comprensión y capacidad de decisión / The informed consent in the mature minor: Understanding and decision-making capacity

Introducción: El consentimiento informado del menor es un requerimiento fundamental de la investigación pediátrica. Actualmente existe una desarmonización en cuanto a la edad del menor maduro para consentir y no se dispone de herramientas sistemáticas para evaluar la competencia en la capacidad de decisión. El objetivo de este trabajo es analizar la situación ética y legal del consentimiento en menores, así como los estudios que utilizan un instrumento objetivo de evaluación en el menor maduro.Material y métodos: Revisión bibliográfica de artículos científicos en PubMed, Embase y Literatura gris, publicados con palabras clave «informed consent minors», sin restricción de fecha hasta marzo 2019. Se revisaron los abstracts y una selección de los artículos completos siguiendo un protocolo de identificación, cribado, elegibilidad e inclusión.Resultados: De los 260 registros identificados, se excluyeron 139. Tras categorizar los 121 artículos resultantes, finalmente se seleccionaron 13 siguiendo los criterios de elegibilidad, incluyéndose 7 artículos sobre normativa ética y legal internacional, y 6 sobre evaluación de comprensión y capacidad de decisión. En 4 estudios se ha utilizado la entrevista semiestructurada McCarthur Competency Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR), en diferentes rangos de edad (6-21 años), niños sanos y con alguna patología.Conclusiones: La entrevista semiestructurada McCarthur adaptada a adolescentes podría ser una herramienta adecuada con medidas psicométricas robustas para la valoración de competencia para el consentimiento informado de menores entre 9 y 12 años. La regulación del consentimiento informado en investigación pediátrica debería ser receptiva a estas evidencias. (AU)

Introduction: The informed consent of the minor is a fundamental requirement of paediatric research. There is a lack of harmonisation as regards the age of the mature minor to consent, and there are no systematic tools available to assess competence in decision-making capacity. The objective of this work is to analyse the ethical and legal situation of consent by minors, as well as studies that use an objective assessment tool in the mature minor.Material and methods: Systematic review of scientific articles in PubMed, Embase and the Grey Literature, published with keywords “informed consent minors”, without date restriction until March 2019. Abstracts and a selection of complete articles were reviewed following a protocol including identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion.Results: Of the 260 records identified, 139 were excluded. After categorising the resulting 121 publications, 13 were finally selected following the eligibility criteria, including 7 articles on international ethical and legal regulations and 6 on understanding and decision- making capacity assessment. The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR) semi-structured interview was used in 4 studies, including different age ranges (6-21 years) in healthy and sick children.Conclusions: The semi-structured MacArthur interview adapted to adolescents could be an appropriate tool with robust psychometric measures for assessing competence for the informed consent of minors between 9 and 12 years of age. The regulation of informed consent in paediatric research should consider this evidence. (AU)

Adolescent Consent for Human Papillomavirus Vaccine: Ethical, Legal, and Practical Considerations.

We address ethical, legal, and practical issues related to adolescent self-consent for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination. HPV vaccination coverage continues to lag well behind the national goal of 80% series completion. Structural and behavioral interventions have improved vaccination rates, but attitudinal, behavioral, and access barriers remain. A potential approach for increasing access and improving vaccination coverage would be to permit adolescents to consent to HPV vaccination for themselves. We argue that adolescent self-consent is ethical, but that there are legal hurdles to be overcome in many states. In jurisdictions where self-consent is legal, there can still be barriers due to lack of awareness of the policy among healthcare providers and adolescents. Other barriers to implementation of self-consent include resistance from antivaccine and parent rights activists, reluctance of providers to agree to vaccinate even when self-consent is legally supported, and threats to confidentiality. Confidentiality can be undermined when an adolescent's self-consented HPV vaccination appears in an explanation of benefits communication sent to a parent or if a parent accesses an adolescent's vaccination record via state immunization information systems. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has led to a substantial drop in HPV vaccination, there may be even more reason to consider self-consent. The atmosphere of uncertainty and distrust surrounding future COVID-19 vaccines underscores the need for any vaccine policy change to be pursued with clear communication and consistent with ethical principles.

When Does A Minor's Legal Competence To Make Health Care Decisions Matter?

In this article, I examine the role of minors' competence for medical decision-making in modern American law. The doctrine of parental consent remains the default legal and bioethical framework for health care decisions on behalf of children, complemented by a complex array of exceptions. Some of those exceptions vest decisional authority in the minors themselves. Yet, in American law, judgments of minors' competence do not typically trigger shifts in decision-making authority from adults to minors. Rather, minors' decisional capacity becomes relevant only after legislatures or courts determine that the default of parental discretion does not achieve important policy goals or protect implicated constitutional rights in a particular health care context and that those goals can best be achieved or rights best protected by authorizing capable minors to choose for themselves. It is at that point that psychological and neuroscientific evidence plays an important role in informing the legal inquiry as to whether minors whose health is at issue are legally competent to decide.

Ethical Issues Raised by the Media Portrayal of Adolescent Transplant Refusals.

Cases of adolescents in organ failure who refuse solid organ transplant are not common, but several have been discussed in the media in the United States and the United Kingdom. Using the framework developed by Buchanan and Brock for surrogate decision-making, I examine what role the adolescent should morally play when deciding about therapy for life-threatening conditions. I argue that the greater the efficacy of treatment, the less voice the adolescent (and the parent) should have. I then consider how refusals of highly effective transplant cases are similar to and different from refusals of other lifesaving therapies (eg, chemotherapy for leukemia), which is more commonly discussed in the media and medical literature. I examine whether organ scarcity and the need for lifelong immunosuppression justify differences in whether the state intervenes when an adolescent and his or her parents refuse a transplant. I argue that the state, as parens patriae, has an obligation to provide the social supports needed for a successful transplant and follow-up treatment plan, although family refusals may be permissible when the transplant is experimental or of low efficacy because of comorbidities or other factors. I conclude by discussing the need to limit media coverage of pediatric treatment refusals.

Whether to Waive Parental Permission in HIV Prevention Research Among Adolescents: Ethical and Legal Considerations.

Critical ethical questions arise concerning whether studies among adolescents of new behavioral and biomedical HIV preventive interventions such as Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) should obtain parental permission. This paper examines the relevant regulations and ethical guidance concerning waivers of parental permission, and arguments for and against such waivers. Opponents of such waivers may argue that adolescent decision-making is "too immature" and that parents always have rights to decide how to protect their children. Yet requiring parental permission may put adolescents at risk, and/or limit adolescent participation, jeopardizing study findings' validity. This paper presents recommendations on when researchers and Institutional Review Boards (IRB) should waive parental permission, and what special protections should be adopted for adolescents who consent for themselves, e.g., assuring adolescent privacy and confidentiality, screening for capacity to consent, and identifying adolescents who are at elevated risk from study participation. We also present a series of specific areas for future research to design tools to help make these assessments, and to inform researcher and IRB decisions. These recommendations can help ensure that research is conducted that can aid adolescents at risk for HIV, while minimizing risks and protecting these individuals' rights as much as possible.

Long-term Puberty Suppression for a Nonbinary Teenager.

Many transgender and gender-diverse people have a gender identity that does not conform to the binary categories of male or female; they have a nonbinary gender. Some nonbinary individuals are most comfortable with an androgynous gender expression. For those who have not yet fully progressed through puberty, puberty suppression with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists can support an androgynous appearance. Although such treatment is shown to ameliorate the gender dysphoria and serious mental health issues commonly seen in transgender and gender-diverse young people, long-term use of puberty-suppressing medications carries physical health risks and raises various ethical dilemmas. In this Ethics Rounds, we analyze a case that raised issues about prolonged pubertal suppression for a patient with a nonbinary gender.

Reflecting on 'Hannah's Choice': Using the Ethics of Care to Justify Child Participation in End of Life Decision-Making.

It has been ten years since the case of Hannah Jones-the 12-year-old girl who was permitted to refuse a potentially life-saving heart transplant. In the past decade, there has been some progress within law and policy in respect of children's participatory rights (UNCRC-Article 12), and a greater understanding of family-centred decision-making. However, the courts still largely maintain their traditional reluctance to find children Gillick competent to refuse medical treatment. In this article, I revisit Hannah's case through the narrative account provided by Hannah and her mother, to ascertain what lessons can be learnt. I use an Ethics of Care framework specially developed for children in mid-childhood, such as Hannah, to argue for more a creative and holistic approach to child decision-making in healthcare. I conclude that using traditional paradigms is untenable in the context of palliative care and at the end of life, and that the law should be able to accommodate greater, and even determinative, participation of children who are facing their own deaths.

Giving Children a Say without Giving Them a Choice: Obtaining Affirmation of a child's Non-dissent to Participation in Nonbeneficial Research.

To what extent, if any, should minors have a say about whether they participate in research that offers them no prospect of direct benefit? This article addresses this question as it pertains to minors who cannot understand enough about what their participation would involve to make an autonomous choice, but can comprehend enough to have and express opinions about participating. The first aim is to defend David Wendler and Seema Shah's claim that minors who meet this description should not be offered a choice about whether they participate. The second aim is to show, contra Wendler and Shah, that the principle of nonmaleficence requires more with respect to giving these minors a say than merely respecting their dissent. Additionally, it requires that investigators obtain affirmation of their non-dissent. This addresses intuitive concerns about denying children a choice, while steering clear of the problems that arise with allowing them one.

Why parents consent to their children's participation in genetic research: A study of parental decision making.

Parents need to be asked to provide informed consent on behalf of their child for participation in genetic research. Decision making for such parents is difficult because ethical challenges in paediatric genetic research studies are different from similar adult studies. This paper focuses on interviews conducted with parents who were asked to consent to their children's participation (or not) in a genetic research study of intellectual disability and/or autism.

The Medico-Legal 'Making' of 'The Transgender Child'.

Thirty years ago, the transgender child would have made no sense to the general public, nor to young people. Today, children and adolescents declare themselves transgender, the National Health Service diagnoses 'gender dysphoria', and laws and policy are developed which uphold young people's 'choice' to transition and to authorize stages at which medical intervention is permissible and desirable. The figure of the 'transgender child' presumed by medicine and law is not a naturally occurring category of person external to medical diagnosis and legal protection. Medicine and law construct the 'transgender child' rather than that the 'transgender child' exists independently of medico-legal discourse. The ethical issue of whether the child and young person can 'consent' to social and medical transition goes beyond legal assessment of whether a person under16 years has the mental capacity to consent, understand to what s/he is consenting, and can express independent wishes. It shifts to examination of the recent making of 'the transgender child' through the complex of power/knowledge/ethics of medicine and the law of which the child can have no knowledge but within which its own desires are both constrained and incited.

Adolescent patients and the clinical decision about their health / O paciente adolescente e a deliberação clínica sobre a sua saúde

ABSTRACT Objective: To carry out a review of the literature on adolescents' participation in decision making for their own health. Data sources: Review in the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) and PubMed databases. We consider scientific articles and books between 1966 and 2017. Keywords: adolescence, autonomy, bioethics and adolescence, autonomy, ethics, in variants in the English, Portuguese and Spanish languages. Inclusion criteria: scientific articles, books and theses on clinical decision making by the adolescent patient. Exclusion criteria: case reports and articles that did not address the issue. Among 1,590 abstracts, 78 were read in full and 32 were used in this manuscript. Data synthesis: The age at which the individual is able to make decisions is a matter of debate in the literature. The development of a cognitive and psychosocial system is a time-consuming process and the integration of psychological, neuropsychological and neurobiological research in adolescence is fundamental. The ability to mature reflection is not determined by chronological age; in theory, a mature child is able to consent or refuse treatment. Decision-making requires careful and reflective analysis of the main associated factors, and the approach of this problem must occur through the recognition of the maturity and autonomy that exists in the adolescents. To do so, it is necessary to "deliberate" with them. Conclusions: International guidelines recommend that adolescents participate in discussions about their illness, treatment and decision-making. However, there is no universally accepted consensus on how to assess the decision-making ability of these patients. Despite this, when possible, the adolescent should be included in a serious, honest, respectful and sincere process of deliberation.

RESUMO Objetivo: Realizar uma revisão da literatura sobre a participação do adolescente na tomada de decisão sobre a sua saúde. Fonte de dados: Revisão nos bancos Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS) e PubMed. Consideramos artigos científicos e livros entre 1966 e 2017. Palavras-chave: adolescência, autonomia, bioética e adolescência, autonomia, ética, em línguas inglesa, portuguesa e espanhola. Critérios de inclusão: artigos científicos, livros e dissertações que contemplassem a tomada de decisão clínica pelo paciente adolescente. Critérios de exclusão: relatos de caso e artigos que não abordavam a questão norteada nesta pesquisa. Do total de 1.590 resumos, 78 foram lidos na íntegra, e 36, utilizados neste manuscrito. Síntese dos dados: A idade em que o indivíduo é capaz para tomar decisões é motivo de debate na literatura. O desenvolvimento de um sistema cognitivo e psicossocial é um processo demorado, e faz-se fundamental a integração da investigação psicológica, neuropsicológica e neurobiológica na adolescência. A capacidade de reflexão madura não é determinada pela idade cronológica; em teoria, um menor maduro seria capaz de consentir ou recusar um tratamento. A tomada de decisão exige análise cuidadosa e reflexiva dos principais fatores associados, e a abordagem desse problema deve ocorrer por meio do reconhecimento da maturidade e da autonomia que existe no adolescente. Para tanto, é necessário "deliberar" com ele. Conclusões: Diretrizes internacionais recomendam que os adolescentes participem de discussões sobre sua doença, tratamento e tomada de decisão, entretanto não há nenhum consenso universalmente aceito sobre como avaliar a capacidade de decisão desses pacientes. Apesar disso, quando possível, o adolescente deve ser incluído em um processo sério, honesto, respeitoso e sincero de deliberação.

Banking the Future: Adolescent Capacity to Consent to Biobank Research.

Adolescents are an important population to represent in biobanks. Inclusion of biospecimens from adolescents advances our understanding of the long-term consequences of pediatric disease and allows the discovery of methods to prevent adult diseases during childhood. Consent for biobanking is complex, especially when considering adolescent participation, as it brings up issues that are not present with general clinical research. The development and successful implementation of an adolescent capacity assessment tool applied specifically to biobanking can potentially provide researchers and clinicians with contextualized information on participants' understanding, appreciation, reasoning, and voluntary choice for biobanks. This tool would enhance current studies looking at the role of shared decision-making in biobanking, as well as provide a formal measurement when considering decisions around pediatric and adolescent biobanking participation. This study adapted the MacCAT-CR for use with a hypothetical adolescent biobank study and examines predictors of MacCAT-CR scores on healthy and chronically ill adolescents.

ADOLESCENT PATIENTS AND THE CLINICAL DECISION ABOUT THEIR HEALTH.

OBJECTIVE: To carry out a review of the literature on adolescents' participation in decision making for their own health. DATA SOURCES: Review in the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) and PubMed databases. We consider scientific articles and books between 1966 and 2017. Keywords: adolescence, autonomy, bioethics and adolescence, autonomy, ethics, in variants in the English, Portuguese and Spanish languages. Inclusion criteria: scientific articles, books and theses on clinical decision making by the adolescent patient. Exclusion criteria: case reports and articles that did not address the issue. Among 1,590 abstracts, 78 were read in full and 32 were used in this manuscript. DATA SYNTHESIS: The age at which the individual is able to make decisions is a matter of debate in the literature. The development of a cognitive and psychosocial system is a time-consuming process and the integration of psychological, neuropsychological and neurobiological research in adolescence is fundamental. The ability to mature reflection is not determined by chronological age; in theory, a mature child is able to consent or refuse treatment. Decision-making requires careful and reflective analysis of the main associated factors, and the approach of this problem must occur through the recognition of the maturity and autonomy that exists in the adolescents. To do so, it is necessary to "deliberate" with them. CONCLUSIONS: International guidelines recommend that adolescents participate in discussions about their illness, treatment and decision-making. However, there is no universally accepted consensus on how to assess the decision-making ability of these patients. Despite this, when possible, the adolescent should be included in a serious, honest, respectful and sincere process of deliberation.

Allowing Adolescents to Weigh Benefits and Burdens of High-stakes Therapies.

We present the case of a girl aged 17 years and 10 months who has a strong family history of long QT syndrome and genetic testing confirming the diagnosis of long QT syndrome in the patient also. She was initially medically treated with ß-blocker therapy; however, after suffering 1 episode of syncope during exertion, she underwent placement of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Since then, she has never had syncope. However, during the few months before this presentation, she experienced shocks on multiple occasions without any underlying arrhythmias. These shocks are disconcerting for her, and she is having significant anxiety about them. She requests the defibrillator to be inactivated. However, her mother, who also shares the diagnosis of long QT syndrome, disagrees and wants the defibrillator to remain active. The ethics team is consulted in this setting of disagreement between an adolescent, who is 2 months shy of the age of maturity and medical decision-making, and her mother, who is currently responsible for her medical decisions. The question for the consultation is whether it would be ethically permissible for the doctors to comply with the patient's request to turn off the defibrillator or whether the doctors should follow the mother's wishes until the patient is 18 years of age.