Who is responsible for identifying and upholding a child's best interests?

This chapter identifies that laws governing childhood have evolved from failing to acknowledge the distinct interests of children to requiring a singular focus on upholding a child’s best interests. Through a comparative doctrinal analysis of the current laws in England and Wales, Australia, and New Zealand it demonstrates that, in relation to decisions about life-sustaining treatment, this evolution has not been accompanied by an adequate explanation of what it means to protect a child’s best interests. There is a lack of delineation between the roles of parents, doctors, and the courts in determining whether a treatment is in a child’s best interests. There is also a lack of clarity about the extent to which issues beyond the physiological effects of treatment are relevant.