Serious question about parents and the health of their child.?

Where do you think the line should be drawn for parents being allowed to make health choices for their children?





At what age, and under what circumstances should the government be allowed to step in?





At what age, and under what circumstances should the a doctor be allowed to step in?





At what age should the child be able to decide for themselves?





Should medical or government interventions be allowed if the person is legally an adult?





Many parents choose to leave it in god/nature's hands and just pray/wait.





Certain religions or even strong non-religious beliefs dissuade parents from allowing their children to get blood transfusions, inoculations, and/or certain medicines and procedures.





Many medicines and especially inoculations come from animal sources requiring animal experimentation at the least, and often the death or use of an animal.





Often there is a justifiable fear of risk from the treatment itself, and sometimes there is not.|||When neglect comes into play. It is a parents duty to provide there child with healthcare etc. And if a parent fails to do this a number of occasions then someone has to step in.





I never leave anything in goods hands or wait something out. If my son is ill to give me concerns over it I'll be the first one in line at the doctors.





If I was to refuse treatment for my son in regards to his medical issues I know for a fact a court order would be obtain. So I think that one rule for all should be applied not just particular circumstances.|||In most cases, children ARE allowed to make decisions regarding their own health from about age 14 on. Provided that the medical professional has deemed the child competent enough to do so. This is why girls under the age of consent are able to get birth control without parental consent, get treatment for sexually transmitted diseases without parental consent and seek obstetrical care without parental consent.