The case of Tyler Dueck, a Saskatoon adolescent who refused potentially lifesaving medical therapy, has made Canadian physicians question whether adolescents have the right to make decisions about their health care. Drs. Christopher Doig and Ellen Burgess review the arguments for and against, including the idea of "proportionality," which states that the more serious the health outcome, the higher the level of competency required. The authors identify a clear ethical and legal foundation for permitting competent adolescents to decide whether they will accept life-sustaining medical treatment.

"Given that most adolescents have the capacity necessary to make competent health care decisions, the ethical physician should respect this and allow the competent adolescent the right to exercise autonomy," the authors conclude.

Withholding life-sustaining treatment: Are adolescents competent to make these decisions? - C. Doig, E. Burgess