Informed consent

Informed Consent, also Informed Consent and Informed Consent, a neologism based on the English model term Informed Consent, also Informed Consent, refers in the context of medical treatment to the patient's informed consent to interventions and other medical measures. On the basis of the patient's right of personality and self-determination, only such treatments may be carried out that are supported by the patient's will. Treatments that have been carried out without effective consent may lead to claims for compensation by the patient against the person providing treatment. In criminal and tort law, (prior) consent justifies interference with the patient's bodily integrity and thus does not expose the physician to prosecution for bodily injury (§§ 223 and 230 StGB). Consent presupposes the capacity to consent, which - depending on the existing capacity for insight - may also be given in the case of incompetent persons. Under certain circumstances, consent must be given by the legal representative(s) or by a legal guardian. In this context, the approval of the guardianship court may be required in accordance with section 1904 of the German Civil Code. The authority to give consent can be transferred to a proxy, for example by means of a health care proxy.

In human research, informed consent is only qualified consent that is given after the other party, for example the doctor, therapist or experimenter, has fulfilled its duty to inform. An overview of individual issues of informed consent in the USA is provided in the freely available publication by Margaret J. Neff.

The idea of informed consent has also found application in various other areas of society, such as consumer protection and science law.

Civil and criminal significance of consent.

According to Section 630d of the German Civil Code, the practitioner is obliged to obtain the patient's consent before carrying out a medical measure, in particular an intervention in the body or health. The practitioner must ask the patient expressly and unambiguously whether he or she consents to the measure, after having properly informed him or her in advance in an understandable manner.

Effective, i.e. informed, consent is the justification for the practitioner to inflict bodily harm associated with the treatment, so that the bodily harming treatment measures, insofar as they are covered by consent, do not give rise to criminal or tort liability on the part of the practitioner.

Informed consent in the sexual abuse debate

The term informed consent has been used since 1979 by the American author David Finkelhor as a justification for a general rejection of sex with children. Finkelhor formulated that children, and in some cases adolescents, can willingly consent to sexual acts, but in doing so they do not overlook the implications of such consent. Accordingly, they did not knowingly (informed) consent to the act, regardless of whom they were consenting to. Finkelhor's studies demonstrated dramatic harm in a large proportion of abuse victims, but not all. He thus found a developmental psychological argument against sexual acts with children that does not necessarily rely on proof of harm, thus sparing the victim humiliating investigations if necessary.

Informed consent has no relevance to the legal consideration of sex with children as sexual abuse; most states have an age of consent below which sexual activity is prohibited.

The concept of knowing consent was countered by proponents (advocates) of pedophilic relationships such as Walter Bärsch, Rüdiger Lautmann and Ernst Bornemann.