Ethical Dilemmas and Recommendations
To begin with, it is important to note that the final outcome in Marion's case did not stop sterilisation from occurring. A just outcome is one that is an outcome based on what is morally right or fair. In regards to Marion's Case, a just outcome would be one where the outcome that promotes social cohesion. After Marion's case, seventeen similar cases came to the Family Court and the sterilisation had been authorised. In the same period of time at least 1045 girls had been sterilised (C S., 1999). Furthermore, there are parents who are taking their children overseas to have hysterectomies performed as the procedures are being denied by the Guardianship Tribunal (R, 2013). These examples demonstrate the primary ethical concern revolving around the sterilisation of disabled childrenand that the final decision is not just. That is the limitation that the parents have regarding making decisions towards their mentally incompetent child. This issue was highlighted in Marion's case where it was decided that, for such procedures, consent must be given by the courts and that sterilisation must be a last resort. Although parents do have responsibility in regards to medical treatment, the responsibility is very much limited depending on the procedure and the competence of the child (C, 1999).
To solve such a delicate concern, it is recommended that the law is made more reflective on the circumstances involved with the child and the severity of the disability. Additionally, the courts should only interfere with non-therapeutic operations such as sterilisation when families are seeking sterilisation for their disabled child before any other methods have been implemented rather than the tribunal only allowing sterilisation as a last resort. It is also suggested that far more flexibility is given to the parents in making decisions for their own children. This would prevent families finding ways around the law such as leaving the country to perform such non-therapeutic operations as previously discussed. These statistics show that the current law does not promote social cohesion and as a result must be changed. Furthermore, if this recommendation were to take effect, it would reduce the amount of cases that reach Australia's congested courts and also relieve families of waiting for such long periods of time. Marion's case commenced in 1990 and closed in 1992 (C, 1999). This is sometimes a very long period of time for families to wait for a decision. As a result, the previously mentioned recommendation would prove itself far more efficient if it were to bypass somewhat unnecessary obstacles and provide more flexibility to the parents of their disabled child.
To solve such a delicate concern, it is recommended that the law is made more reflective on the circumstances involved with the child and the severity of the disability. Additionally, the courts should only interfere with non-therapeutic operations such as sterilisation when families are seeking sterilisation for their disabled child before any other methods have been implemented rather than the tribunal only allowing sterilisation as a last resort. It is also suggested that far more flexibility is given to the parents in making decisions for their own children. This would prevent families finding ways around the law such as leaving the country to perform such non-therapeutic operations as previously discussed. These statistics show that the current law does not promote social cohesion and as a result must be changed. Furthermore, if this recommendation were to take effect, it would reduce the amount of cases that reach Australia's congested courts and also relieve families of waiting for such long periods of time. Marion's case commenced in 1990 and closed in 1992 (C, 1999). This is sometimes a very long period of time for families to wait for a decision. As a result, the previously mentioned recommendation would prove itself far more efficient if it were to bypass somewhat unnecessary obstacles and provide more flexibility to the parents of their disabled child.