Various international laws and guidelines stress the importance of respecting the developing autonomy of children and involving minors in decision-making regarding treatment and research participation. However, no universal agreement exists as to at what age minors should be deemed decision-making competent. Minors of the same age may show different levels of maturity. In addition, patients deemed rational conversation-partners as a child can suddenly become noncompliant as an adolescent. Age, context and development all play a role in decision-making competence. In this article we adopt a perspective on competence that specifically focuses on the impact of brain development on the child’s decision-making process. We believe that the discussion on decision-making competence of minors can greatly benefit from a multidisciplinary approach. We adopted such an approach in order to contribute to the understanding on how to deal with children in decision-making situations. Evidence emerging from neuroscience research concerning the developing brain structures in minors is combined with insights from various other fields, such as psychology, decision-making science and ethics. Four capacities have been described that are required for (medical) decision-making: (1) communicating a choice; (2) understanding; (3) reasoning; and (4) appreciation. Each capacity is related to a number of specific skills and abilities that need to be sufficiently developed to support the capacity. Based on this approach it can be concluded that at the age of 12 children can have the capacity to be decision-making competent. However, this age coincides with the onset of adolescence. Early development of the brain’s reward system combined with late development of the control system diminishes decision-making competence in adolescents in specific contexts. We conclude that even adolescents possessing capacities required for decision-making, may need support of facilitating environmental factors. This paper intends to offer insight in neuroscientific mechanisms underlying the medical decision-making capacities in minors and to stimulate practices for optimal involvement of minors. Developing minors become increasingly capable of decision-making, but the neurobiological development in adolescence affects competence in specific contexts. Adequate support should be offered in order to create a context in which minors can make competently make decisions.

For decades, the discussion on children’s competence to consent to medical issues has concentrated around normative concerns, with little progress in clinical practices. Decision-making competence is an important condition in the informed consent model. In pediatrics, clinicians need to strike a proper balance in order to both protect children’s interests when they are not fully able to do so themselves and to respect their autonomy when they are. Children’s competence to consent, however, is currently not assessed in a standardized way. Moreover, the correlation between competence to give informed consent and age in children has never been systematically investigated, nor do we know which factors exactly contribute to children’s competence. This article aims at identifying these gaps in knowledge and suggests options for dealing with the obstacles in empirical research in order to advance policies and practices regarding children’s medical decision-making competence. Understanding children’s competency is hampered by the law. Legislative regulations concerning competency are established on a strong presumption that persons older than a certain age are competent, whereas younger persons are not. Furthermore, a number of contextual factors are believed to be of influence on a child’s decision-making competence: the developmental stage of children, the influence of parents and peers, the quality of information provision, life experience, the type of medical decision, and so on. Ostensibly, these diverse and extensive barriers hinder any form of advancement in this conflicted area. Addressing these obstacles encourages the discussion on children’s competency, in which the most prominent question concerns the lack of a clear operationalization of children’s competence to consent. Empirical data are needed to substantiate the discussion. The empirical approach offers an opportunity to give direction to the debate. Recommendations for future research include: studying a standardized assessment instrument covering all four relevant dimensions of competence (understanding, reasoning, appreciation, expressing a choice), including a study population of children covering the full age range of 7 to 18 years, improving information provision, and assessing relevant contextual data.

For many decades, the debate on children’s competence to give informed consent in medical settings concentrated on ethical and legal aspects, with little empirical underpinnings. Recently, data from empirical research became available to advance the discussion. It was shown that children’s competence to consent to clinical research could be accurately assessed by the modified MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research. Age limits for children to be deemed competent to decide on research participation have been studied: generally children of 11.2 years and above were decision-making competent, while children of 9.6 years and younger were not. Age was pointed out to be the key determining factor in children’s competence. In this article we reflect on policy implications of these findings, considering legal, ethical, developmental and clinical perspectives. Although assessment of children’s competence has a normative character, ethics, law and clinical practice can benefit from research data. The findings may help to do justice to the capacities children possess and challenges they may face when deciding about treatment and research options. We discuss advantages and drawbacks of standardized competence assessment in children on a case-by-case basis compared to application of a fixed age limit, and conclude that a selective implementation of case-by-case competence assessment in specific populations is preferable. We recommend the implementation of age limits based on empirical evidence. Furthermore, we elaborate on a suitable model for informed consent involving children and parents that would do justice to developmental aspects of children and the specific characteristics of the parent-child dyad. Previous research outcomes showed that children’s medical decision-making capacities could be operationalized into a standardized assessment instrument. Recommendations for policies include a dual consent procedure, including both child as well as parents, for children from the age of 12 until they reach majority. For children between 10 and 12 years of age, and in case of children older than 12 years in special research populations of mentally compromised patients, we suggest a case-by-case assessment of children’s competence to consent. Since such a dual consent procedure is fundamentally different from a procedure of parental permission and child assent, and would imply a considerable shift regarding some current legislations, practical implications are elaborated.

At present, more than 50% of drugs prescribed to children have not been tested in their age group.¹ Prescribers often have no alternative but to extrapolate to children the doses of drugs registered for adults. Historically the protection of children from research was often translated as simply excluding them from trials.² Research with this vulnerable population involves many unique ethical and legal considerations. Little is known about children’s capacities to meaningfully decide on research participation. To our knowledge, the correlation between competence and age in children has never been systematically investigated.

Based on the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child (CRC), it is a child’s right to participate in all matters concerning its wellbeing. Little is known about chronically and/or critically ill children’s participation in pediatric shared decision-making (SDM). We explored medical literature to see if and how these children participate in pediatric SDM. We searched relevant medical databases published between January 2008 and January 2020 for studies targeting children aged 4–18 years old, suffering from a chronic and/or critical disease. We found 9 relevant studies. SDM interventions mostly used were decision aids (n=8), questionnaires for caretakers/parents and children (n=4), and a SDM toolkit (n=2). Perceived involvement in SDM and knowledge increased amongst children, adolescents, and caretakers following these interventions. Decisional conflict measured using the 0–100 point DCS scale (higher scores indicate more decisional conflict) was reduced by 15.9 points in one study (p<0.01) and 17.8 points in another (95%CI: 13.3–22.9). Lower scores were associated with higher satisfaction with the decision aid by children, caretakers, and clinicians.Conclusion: Stakeholders should advocate initiatives to facilitate a child’s participation preferences regarding pediatric SDM since decision support tools help chronically ill children to be more involved in SDM as they increase the children’s knowledge and satisfaction and reduce decisional conflicts. What is Known:• Decision aids can help improve participation, knowledge, satisfaction, and health outcomes.• Quality and consistency of the information exchange impact quality and outcome of SDM. What is New:• Depending on a child’s age, evolving capacities, and communication and participation preferences, more evidence is needed on which tools are suitable for chronically ill children to ensure their preferred participation in pediatric SDM.• Pediatricians adopt healthcare SDM tools and techniques that do not always take into account that a child’s right to participate in pediatric SDM including the tendency to use interventions that are not specifically designed for pediatrics.

To mark 15 years of the European Journal of Psychotraumatology, editors reviewed the past 15-year years of research on trauma exposure and its consequences, as well as developments in (early) psychological, pharmacological and complementary interventions. In all sections of this paper, we provide perspectives on sex/gender aspects, life course trends, and cross-cultural/global and systemic societal contexts. Globally, the majority of people experience stressful events that may be characterized as traumatic. However, definitions of what is traumatic are not necessarily straightforward or universal. Traumatic events may have a wide range of transdiagnostic mental and physical health consequences, not limited to posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Research on genetic, molecular, and neurobiological influences show promise for further understanding underlying risk and resilience for trauma-related consequences. Symptom presentation, prevalence, and course, in response to traumatic experiences, differ depending on individuals' age and developmental phase, sex/gender, sociocultural and environmental contexts, and systemic socio-political forces. Early interventions have the potential to prevent acute posttraumatic stress reactions from escalating to a PTSD diagnosis whether delivered in the golden hours or weeks after trauma. However, research on prevention is still scarce compared to treatment research where several evidence-based psychological, pharmacological and complementary/ integrative interventions exist, and novel forms of delivery have become available. Here, we focus on how best to address the range of negative health outcomes following trauma, how to serve individuals across the age spectrum, including the very young and old, and include considerations of sex/gender, ethnicity, and culture in diverse contexts, beyond Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) countries. We conclude with providing directions for future research aimed at improving the well-being of all people impacted by trauma around the world. The 15 years EJPT webinar provides a 90-minute summary of this paper and can be downloaded here [http://bit.ly/4jdtx6k].