Compromise, coercion and delay: best interests decision-making in mediation of paediatric medical treatment disputes

Journal article

This article explores the role of mediation in best interests disputes concerning the provision of health and care to children. These cases concern disagreements between healthcare professionals and family members about which treatment should be provided. Mediation, a form of non-judicial resolution, has been argued for as an alternative and more supportive way of approaching these challenging, and often emotionally charged, disagreements. However, mediation is a confidential process, and this can lead to a lack of reliable data. Drawing on data from an empirical project, which looked at the role of mediation in medical treatment disputes, we highlight mediation’s role in securing the best interests of the child. We explore three themes related to best interests: compromise, delay, and coercion. We argue that there is limited evidence from our research of compromise or coercion through the use of mediation, albeit there is some evidence of health professionals feeling pressured into participating in mediation. However, there is evidence that mediation can cause delay in resolution. We suggest that whether this undermines the child’s best interests will depend upon the interpretation, noting that there is value in seeking agreement but the interests of the child need to be at the forefront.

Authors: Lindsey, J; Francis, G

• Publication status: Published
• Peer review status: Peer reviewed
• Publisher: Oxford University Press
• Journal: Medical Law Review
• Volume: 33
• Issue: 4
• Article number: fwaf041
• Publication date: 2025-11-27
• Acceptance date: 2025-10-16
• DOI: 10.1093/medlaw/fwaf041
• EISSN: 1464-3790
• ISSN: 0967-0742
• Language: English
• Keywords: compromise; best interests; conflict; mediation; medical treatment; paediatric disputes