ABSTRACT
Whenever we clinicians are in the throes of a painful ethical dilemma, and especially so in this area of informed consent of minors in health care decisions, we are often confronted with the clinical equivalent of Scylla and Charybdis: The alternative choices are replete with meadows and minefields. Whichever decision is made, somebody, usually more than one person, is by necessity going to be emotionally hurt and possibly traumatized. This is an area fraught with polemic and posturing. Try as we might to assail the conundra with clinical data and legal precedents, our anxiety—and hence our strong, impassioned vocal opinions—rises exponentially. Polar-opposite stances of absolutism and relativism come up against each other with equal fervor, obstinacy, and self-righteousness. Parental fears, clinical uncertainties, and societal biases are inevitably admixed in a cauldron of conflict and confusion. The prism through which a child must deal with imminent, crucial life decisions is focused, filtered, and fragmented by diverse, myriad, and conflicting pressures.
