Abstract：
Over the past few years, some parents and clinicians in the UK have argued about decisions on the fate of critically-ill children, with the cases ending in protracted and emotionally-sapping legal disputes. The long-running legal conflicts have played out in the public eye, eliciting conflicting opinions. At the core of the disputes is whether parents or clinicians should determine the appropriate course of action. In the event of the disagreements, the domestic court intervenes guided by the \'best interests\' principle. A corpus of scholarship, falling on either side of the debate, has captured the contradictions. Until recently, the discourse had focused on the common recourses to domestic courts and the European Court of Human Rights. However, in the recent case of incapacitated 12-year-old Archie Battersbee, his parents sought redress from the international human rights system through the Committee on the Rights of People with Disabilities to stop termination of his life support. The courts barred the involvement of the Committee on the basis that the UK had not incorporated the treaty which birthed the Committee. The case brought into sharp focus the relationship between international law and domestic law. First, this paper asserts that the weight (not) given to international law by the domestic courts was inconsistent with its treatment of international obligations in other cases. Secondly, the position that unincorporated treaties do not have legal effect in domestic proceedings is ambiguous. Finally, the treaty body appeared ill-suited to handle a case of a critically-ill child in the face of the impatient demands of local justice.
摘要：
在过去的几年里，英国的一些家长和临床医生对危重病儿童的命运做出了争论，这些案件以旷日持久的、令人感情用事的法律纠纷告终。长期存在的法律冲突已经在公众的视野中上演，引发矛盾的意见。争议的核心是父母或临床医生是否应确定适当的行动方案。如果发生分歧，国内法院以“最佳利益”原则为指导进行干预。奖学金的语料库，站在辩论的两边，抓住了矛盾。直到最近,讨论的重点是国内法院和欧洲人权法院的共同追索权。然而,在最近12岁的阿奇·巴特斯比丧失工作能力的案例中，他的父母通过残疾人权利委员会向国际人权系统寻求补救，以停止终止其生命支持。法院禁止委员会参与，理由是英国没有纳入成立委员会的条约。该案使国际法与国内法之间的关系成为焦点。首先,本文声称，国内法院对国际法的重视(不)与其在其他案件中对国际义务的处理不一致。其次,未合并的条约在国内程序中不具有法律效力的立场是模糊的。最后,面对当地司法的不耐烦要求，该条约机构似乎不适合处理重症儿童的案件。
