PARENTAL AUTONOMY VERSUS THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD: LEGAL LIMITS ON PARENTAL REFUSAL OF INVASIVE MEDICAL PROCEDURES FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF BIOETHICS AND THE RIGHT TO HEALTH

Abstract

This article addresses the legal tension between parental autonomy in exercising parental authority and the principle of the best interest of the child. The general objective is to analyze the limits for the manifestation of patient autonomy when they, although legally incapable, can express their will. The study concludes that, although parental authority is constitutionally protected, it encounters limits when it compromises the child's fundamental rights, especially the rights to life and health, and one must always be attentive to their condition as subjects of rights, who should be heard on matters involving their interests, having their opinion duly considered, respecting their age and degree of development. In any case, there are no simple solutions or universal formulas, as each case presents particularities that require careful analysis, sensitive deliberation, and well-founded decisions. What the legal system can and should offer are clear parameters, fair procedures, and institutions prepared to face these dilemmas with the seriousness and sensitivity they deserve. The methodology employed was qualitative, deductive, and exploratory in nature, following the technical procedures of bibliographic research.