Decision-Making for a Child

Nothing is healthy for kids. The duty of caring for a child is determined by a variety of factors such as the child’s age, race, class, or gender. Age has a major impact on decision-making. To any extent, caring for an infant and assessing a child’s welfare requires the collaboration of adults, children of the consenting age of majority, and a recognized body. Any of a child’s protection precautions are decided by the adult. Issues that are going to have a long-term effect on the well-being and welfare of children. In certain cases, the decision must be taken by the parents. But this instance may be majorly on the health implications, level of urgency of the decision and the risk associated.

At a certain period of age, the toddler age example the parent is entitled to make decisions pertaining the child’s safety that range from the sports field, matters related to social development and health which may affect the future of the child. However, at some particular time, the child should be involved in the decision making to put his or her interest down really. Communication and building relationship is a better foundation for effective engagement and involvement of children. Therefore, engaging children in decision that may affect their lives is a great move to ensure the child’s voice is heard.

Pediatricians find themselves holding small children down and treating them against will especially toddlers since they do not ask the children for the opinion. (Klass, 2016). However, as they grow, they should be included up in the medical decisions. It ensures the analysis of informed consent of the patients, but the question of approval of a 7-year-old child is questionable since the child is not adequately informed agreement. (Klass, 2016).

No, childhood is a meaningful concept today, despite the vast development and cultural variations. It depends on the age of the newborn infants and the 17-year-old child. Which is from birth to adolescence. In which consist of the two developmental stages according to Piaget’s theory of development. The preoperational stage and concrete operational stage. Therefore, various childhood affects a person attitude. (Piaget, 1968, 27).

No matter how grown regarding the age they are they remain children, and some of the decisions made are not fully informed such an example a parent cannot let a 17-year-old child drive or get drunk since he is grown to this adolescent stage. Yes, you can ask for their voice, respect and include them but do not ask them for choices. (David, 2004).

To some extent, this should be involved to a 17-year-old child in comparison to an infant lesser than 7 years. Therefore, from a professional approach, the childhood concept matters regarding making some of the decision based on various factors. For the pediatricians’ adolescence of age between 12 and 17 are given full information about the treatment to provide informed consent in any medical decisions. An example of several teens who have been included in the medical decision making that are vital for their health.

In the US, a case of Boy who was a 14-year-old male patient informed of a procedure that would lead to the amputation of his limb. It was the only option to cure according to the medical practitioners, however teen refuses. It shows that at some point despite the childhood developmental factor; some decisions made are ungoverned and opt to be respected no matter the consequences after that. (Firger, 2017). In the lawyers and court official context; the mature minority doctrine that has been in place in many of the court settings like a case of the Connecticut supreme court judge where a 17-year-old child had a curable cancer disease through chemotherapy. However, the boy refused to take treatment which was seconded by the mother too.

It shows that medical decisions are in the hands of the children may vary state to state. Which may be affected by the culture and religion. The law states that if a child is a mature minor of age 12 to 17 has the consent to refuse medical procedures if they possess and show they are a mature enough to handle decisions on their own. However, not in every state. The most cases which are challenging are cancer patient treatment according to pediatric (Dr. Douglas Diekema). (Firger, 2017)

The decision making of a child can vary between families, states, and countries too. To some extent the children of toddler age the consent can be provided by the child’s parent, whereas at the young age of between 12 to 17 years; their decisions matter in any field primarily to the states that have the mature minority rule. However, if it is deemed that the consent is not more informed in making decisions, the judges or advocates in the court setting may decide what best for a child at the expense of the medical decisions.

Some of the experts have argued that the medical community has underestimated capacity of children to make reasonable decisions on their treatment. It mostly depends on the view of the child on what they want may it to defend the family or the impact of treatment on their life. With examples, we see where children have made their own decision pertaining treatment; for instance majorly in Us the state on of Connecticut where a 17-year-old kid makes a decision not to go for a chemotherapy treatment of cancer and since he is a mature minority the law is binding. Another case of a boy of age 14 decides on the amputation of the leg as foreseen as the only treatment of the disease from doctors. (Reuters, 2017)

What best for a child has also been depicted in the pediatrics where they do decide the best for them at the toddler age in the example of cleaning of ears to check what’s the infection at this case they may not need the consent. (Klass, 2016). However, the decision of what best for a child is still questionable since some of the decisions made are not mature and Good. To an example where the state can state what best for a child where the state intervenes in the sale and release of the Aristotle a smart home hub for the children made by Mattel. The main concerns being the privacy concerns of the technology. According to Radesky a piece of technology cannot become an active household member for a child. (Tsukayama, 2017)

Child’s parent at some point plays a role in choosing what best for the child. It is by protecting the childhood. Parents care advisable at certain times in ratings creep some of the pediatrics shows the importance of child-parent making decisions on what best regarding technology and in watching films. The PG-13 movies require an age of 13 and more for viewing while the minors are not allowed of age less than 13. Some of the films possess’ certain behaviors that are not good for the development of the child. Therefore, the decision what best for a child can rely mostly on this instance to ensure control of behaviors as also put by MPPA (motion pictures Association of America. (Antunes, 2017)

According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the monstrance of children on media use is advisable due to the increase of technologic transformation of media that may affect the critical brain development, the establishment of healthy behaviors and building of secure relationships. It does not conflict with the UN-CRC’s assertion article 13. In which a child can be digitally exposed to receive and impart information of all kind regardless of frontiers either orally, in writing or print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child’s choice.

To some extent, some of the media choices are not of any use bearing the fact they have an article assertion of watching any media of choice. Some of the children do not make an informed decision about what is good or bad. For infants and toddlers, they need a hand on exploration since this is where the cognitive, language and social-emotional skill is monitored. Some of the media at the age of 2 years below benefits are limited and may lead to harm of cognitive and behaviors. (Pediatrics, 2016). Some of the media sources may provide a hotspot for health and development concerns such as obesity, sleeping, child development and clinical implications. However, at a certain age, the media source is of importance in learning especially the robotic teaching in Singapore which may enhance the abilities of children. Thus, showing it has no conflict with the UN-CRC’s assertion it all depends on guidance.

In conclusion, what best and safe for a child is purely determined by various factors in place may it be the location, age, sex, religion or cultural being. Pediatrics, parents, psychologists, judges, and lawyers play essential roles in the growth of a child through the decisions they make. Being children of a certain age the mature minority can make a discerned decision. Their decision should be put on the account and investigated to ensure there is a lot of information provided to reach the choice. Technological advancement is not a bad idea when introduced in the learning environment; however, it should be monitored by teachers and guardians to ensure proper use and analyze the media given to children due to their social, cognitive growth.

Works Cited.

Archard, David. Children: Rights and Childhood. London: Routledge. (2004)

Filipa Antunes. Protecting children, protecting childhood: the MPAA and the “ratings creep.” (2017)

Hayley Tsukayama. Mattel has canceled plans for a kid-focused AI device that drew privacy concerns. The Washington posts. (2017).

Jeevan Vasagar. How Robots are Teaching Singapore’s Kids. Financial Times Limited. (2017) 1-9

Jessica Firger. Can a Child Refuse to Comply with Cancer Treatment? (2017)

Pediatrics. Media and Young Mind. Council on Communication and Media. American Academy of Pediatrics. (2016) 18(5)

Piaget, Jean. ”The Mental Development of the Child,” in Six Psychological Studies, D. Elkind (ed.), New York: Vintage Books, (1968) 1–73.

Reuters. Are pediatric cancer patients ever in control of their own treatment decisions. (2017