Question

In considering the question of informed consent, Beskow writes of the need to balance "realistic expectations...autonomy...[and] an expanded ethical framework (p. 2). Later in the article, she describes a "chasm between the theoretical ideals of informed consent and what it accomplishes in actual practice" (p. 12). How does this compare to Lacks' argument above and in the rest of the video?

This is the 2nd part of the 3 part question.. and I just can not get what she is asking to do..The book we are doing is the immortal life of heneritta lacks and done part 1.. I am not expecting an answer to this but more like an understanding of it and how to write it out.. I have ADHD and my teacher has not replied back to me when I asked 4 days ago..So if someone could help me understand this and kinda guide me on how to answer it, that would be very helpful..Thanks

Answer 1

It's very difficult to give a pin point answer as question have limitations.Informed consent requirements are ubiquitous in health care, and they are regarded as a cornerstone of ethical medical practice. It is also often treated as a truism that these requirements are to be justified by the principle of respect for autonomy. However, whilst this view is still widely accepted, it has recently been brought into question, with critics suggesting that informed consent requirements are neither necessary nor sufficient for safeguarding individual autonomy.

If a patient agrees to a medical procedure without sufficient understanding, unintentionally, or as a result of controlling influence, then their consent may be described as invalid. There is some debate as to whether the concept of invalid consent is morally meaningful. For instance, writing about coerced consent, John Kleinig claims:

… invalid consent no more counts as consent than an invalid vote counts as a vote. It has form but no substance. It is, I believe, more accurate to say that although A gave his assent, this did not amount to consent.

With this much stringent rules it's almost impossible to get a proper informed consent. But the legal significance of the document is very relevant because the court have put that much significance in one document.

It's also very difficult to enlighten the patient regarding all the complication s and procedures especially in the case of an emergency surgery.

So in actual practice the informed consent will be some way in the middle between the ideal consent covering all complication patient autonomy patient education and blanket consent covering literally nothing. Hope this clarifies.

Please do clarify your doubts using comment facility. Thanks