Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Jun;139(6):e20170234.
doi: 10.1542/peds.2017-0234. Epub 2017 May 12.

Navigating Decisional Discord: The Pediatrician's Role When Child and Parents Disagree

Affiliations

Navigating Decisional Discord: The Pediatrician's Role When Child and Parents Disagree

Bryan A Sisk et al. Pediatrics. 2017 Jun.

Abstract

From the time when children enter the preteen years onward, pediatric medical decision-making can entail a complex interaction between child, parents, and pediatrician. When the child and parents disagree regarding medical decisions, the pediatrician has the challenging task of guiding the family to a final decision. Unresolved discord can affect family cohesiveness, patient adherence, and patient self-management. In this article, we outline 3 models for the pediatrician's role in the setting of decisional discord: deference, advocative, and arbitrative. In the deference model, the pediatrician prioritizes parental decision-making authority. In the advocative model, the pediatrician advocates for the child's preference in decision-making so long as the child's decision is medically reasonable. In the arbitrative model, the pediatrician works to resolve the conflict in a balanced fashion. Although each model has advantages and disadvantages, the arbitrative model should serve as the initial model in nearly all settings. The arbitrative model is likely to reach the most beneficial decision in a manner that maintains family cohesiveness by respecting the authority of parents and the developing autonomy of children. We also highlight, however, occasions when the deference or advocative models may be more appropriate. Physicians should keep all 3 models available in their professional toolkit and develop the wisdom to deploy the right model for each particular clinical situation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Models of the pediatrician’s role when pediatric patient and parent disagree about treatment.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Opel DJ. A push for progress with shared decision-making in pediatrics. Pediatrics. 2017;139(2):e20162526. - PubMed
    1. Nelson RM, Beauchamp T, Miller VA, Reynolds W, Ittenbach RF, Luce MF. The concept of voluntary consent. Am J Bioeth. 2011;11(8):6–16 - PubMed
    1. Committee on Bioethics; American Academy of Pediatrics . Informed consent, parental permission, and assent in pediatric practice. Pediatrics. 1995;95(2):314–317 - PubMed
    1. Hein IM, De Vries MC, Troost PW, Meynen G, Van Goudoever JB, Lindauer RJ. Informed consent instead of assent is appropriate in children from the age of twelve: policy implications of new findings on children’s competence to consent to clinical research. BMC Med Ethics. 2015;16(1):76. - PMC - PubMed
    1. McCabe MA. Involving children and adolescents in medical decision making: developmental and clinical considerations. J Pediatr Psychol. 1996;21(4):505–516 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources