| Popis: |
This paper studies the case law of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Colombia of 26 April 2017 (Case C-246/17) which interpret the capacity of the minor to give informed consent to aesthetic medicine and plastic surgery treatments, as well as participation of such person in campaigns promoting this type of treatments. In this case, the Court first decided that the ban on aesthetic medicine and plastic surgery procedures for minors should not be applied to adolescents over 14 years of age who, due to their level of development, are able to participate together with persons having parental authority in the decision-making about the risks involved in such procedures and are able to consent to the procedure in an informed and qualified manner. The Constitutional Court also finds that the prohibition on participating in campaigns promoting cosmetic medicine clinics and the treatments carried out there, which applies to persons aged between 15 and 18, is a proportionate and effective restriction. In this way, the legislator achieves constitutionally legitimate objectives, i.e. discouraging treatments that may expose the health of a minor to unnecessary risks and reducing gender stereotypes regarding a certain canon of beauty. In assessing this ruling, the article examines the concepts of: “free development of personality”, “right to privacy”, “informed consent to medical treatment” of minors, as well as “legal moralism” and “paternalist measures”. To this end, a dogmatic method was used by reviewing the case law of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Colombia, and the results obtained were presented through a descriptive method. In the conclusions, attention is drawn to the consistent doctrine existing in the Court’s jurisprudence relating to the concepts. |
