The world built the most powerful consent doctrine in human history. Then Fauci and his type quietly carved out the one place it matters most. We remain disciplined and at the ready by knowledge.
Jack, you refer to Justice Benjamin Cardozo’s statement that “every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body.” You note that sentence is now the bedrock of American medical consent - and it came out of a lawsuit over a surgery performed on a woman who had explicitly refused it.
But what you fail to share is that the woman lost the case…because the wrong defendant was sued, she sued the hospital rather than the physician.
The physician, the nurse, the pharmacist - they all have a personal obligation to obtain voluntary informed consent before they proceed with a medical intervention, e.g. vaccination.
Yet when they vaccinate an individual who is under a vaccine mandate, being incentivised or coerced to submit to the intervention under threat of penalty, they cannot possibly obtain ethically valid voluntary informed consent under those conditions.
When we think of how widespread vaccine mandates have been for years - for children, for the military, for medical staff, and more recently for mass populations during ‘Covid’ - there is NO authentic voluntary informed consent for vaccination.
This is the massive scandal waiting to emerge, which has occurred because physicians and nurses and pharmacists have violated their own personal duty to obtain voluntary informed consent.
In the IPAK-EDU Foundations of Informed Consent webinar will you be turning the spotlight onto those who actually wield the needle, administer the intervention? And ask why have they abandoned their ethical duty?
Hi, Elizabeth, the role of dissent in rulings, even prose by those ruling that later reminds us they had half the story, is just this: So future cases/generations can look back and has a touchpoint on sanity. The founding documents of the United States include more than the U.S. Constitution. And yes, indeed we trace the loss of true, free, prior informed consent in the U.S. I hope we can look forward to you participating!
Keith, I tried to convince the electric company and the bank that I'm such a good guy, and the information I share is so valuable, that I should not have any bills. Paying for this information leads to more information in the future. It's an investment, not a cost!
Education is fine, and if people want to become their own legal advocate, that’s fine too. But everyone knows that advocating for your own legal rights on the eve of (or more likely, two hours before) your colonoscopy, angioplasty, or outpatient surgery is nearly impossible, especially when up against preprinted legal forms created by a group of $1500/hour lawyers working for the healthcare facility. And, of course, the top-gun lawyers have written in provisions intended to nullify any “handwritten changes” the patient makes to their one-sided document. What is needed is legal representation for patients before the document is shoved in front of them.
In the Concealed Carry realm, there is a type of prepaid legal representation that is available in case a concealed carrier is forced to shoot a bad guy. I pay $179/year to CCW Safe for a team of lawyers to represent me in court in the unlikely event I have to shoot someone in defense of myself or others. I have paid almost $2000 over the last decade for coverage I have not used, and I consider it money well spent.
I don’t know how a service like that might work in the medical consent realm, but I’m sure there are people smarter than me who could work out something. Perhaps when scheduling the procedure, the patient could say, “I don’t sign medical ‘Consent to treat’ forms except on advice of my lawyer. Fax your consent form to him at —— at least 48 hours before the procedure, and he will approve it or make changes.” This will at least put them on notice that any breech of patient consent will be dealt with by a trained malpractice lawyer, not the patient himself.
Actually, waiting to know how to address these concerns a moment of medical emergency is exactly the wrong time to try to learn. Learn now what you can expect and demand of your doctors, and practice it routinely, so you're ready when you need it most. That's the discipline part.
Why do you think they use these pads to sign in the hospital and doctors offices, you never see the real information on there, your told to sign in a hurried situation like an emergency, surgery, office visit called your name. They know what they are doing, setting us up to be taken advantage of, not really knowing what you’re signing anymore.
As the citizen has virtually few rights, (or many that are protected) at the opposite end is the government who reserves the right to freely murder its citizens with no culpability. Make a million page constitution and then find a way to fully enforce it. Not possible. The enforcers can always be corrupted. Even the most saintly among us can be corrupted. And machines can never be trustworthy. So who is gonna be the ultimate un-corruptable authority? God perhaps but he doesn't always work in a timely manner.
Consent is sacrosanct. But what do you do when the individual with (presumably) agency defends the right of authorities to abridge it as we saw with Covid 'because emergency?'
Nuremberg is crystal clear to us but not so much to the public at large it appears. How many times have we heard people say, 'there was a choice. And that choice came with a consequence' - notably losing one's career or employment. This is where we get into the messy part of how authorities manipulate the public into a Hobson's Choice.
This is an issue that will come up again because the rhetoric coming out of the expert class wasn't 'what did we get wrong and why?' but 'we need to lock down sooner and harder'. This signals to me they're more than ready to shred Nuremberg to permanent bits.
Covid showed their hand. And it was demonic and bad. I told hospital to shove it. I asked to or three questions of the Pathologist pushing the Program at Methodist Dallas and he was clueless. I quietly said no and left.
Superb Nuremberg consent comments. As a cardiac surgeon trained by DeBakey.. we learned how to talk to patients solid. He personally made rounds.. made sure interpreters were around. He spoke French, some Arabic and English. As Cardiac resident I spoke Spanish, German okay, and eventually learned some arabic. So sorry there are no more Dr DeBakeys to teach the young'uns.
Jack, you refer to Justice Benjamin Cardozo’s statement that “every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body.” You note that sentence is now the bedrock of American medical consent - and it came out of a lawsuit over a surgery performed on a woman who had explicitly refused it.
But what you fail to share is that the woman lost the case…because the wrong defendant was sued, she sued the hospital rather than the physician.
The physician, the nurse, the pharmacist - they all have a personal obligation to obtain voluntary informed consent before they proceed with a medical intervention, e.g. vaccination.
Yet when they vaccinate an individual who is under a vaccine mandate, being incentivised or coerced to submit to the intervention under threat of penalty, they cannot possibly obtain ethically valid voluntary informed consent under those conditions.
When we think of how widespread vaccine mandates have been for years - for children, for the military, for medical staff, and more recently for mass populations during ‘Covid’ - there is NO authentic voluntary informed consent for vaccination.
This is the massive scandal waiting to emerge, which has occurred because physicians and nurses and pharmacists have violated their own personal duty to obtain voluntary informed consent.
In the IPAK-EDU Foundations of Informed Consent webinar will you be turning the spotlight onto those who actually wield the needle, administer the intervention? And ask why have they abandoned their ethical duty?
Hi, Elizabeth, the role of dissent in rulings, even prose by those ruling that later reminds us they had half the story, is just this: So future cases/generations can look back and has a touchpoint on sanity. The founding documents of the United States include more than the U.S. Constitution. And yes, indeed we trace the loss of true, free, prior informed consent in the U.S. I hope we can look forward to you participating!
There lies the problem!
Having to pay for this information purposely reduces its exposure!
And having to pay for lunch reduces the amount of lunch I eat.
Everything should be provided free to the masses, right comrade?
Keith, I tried to convince the electric company and the bank that I'm such a good guy, and the information I share is so valuable, that I should not have any bills. Paying for this information leads to more information in the future. It's an investment, not a cost!
Education is fine, and if people want to become their own legal advocate, that’s fine too. But everyone knows that advocating for your own legal rights on the eve of (or more likely, two hours before) your colonoscopy, angioplasty, or outpatient surgery is nearly impossible, especially when up against preprinted legal forms created by a group of $1500/hour lawyers working for the healthcare facility. And, of course, the top-gun lawyers have written in provisions intended to nullify any “handwritten changes” the patient makes to their one-sided document. What is needed is legal representation for patients before the document is shoved in front of them.
In the Concealed Carry realm, there is a type of prepaid legal representation that is available in case a concealed carrier is forced to shoot a bad guy. I pay $179/year to CCW Safe for a team of lawyers to represent me in court in the unlikely event I have to shoot someone in defense of myself or others. I have paid almost $2000 over the last decade for coverage I have not used, and I consider it money well spent.
I don’t know how a service like that might work in the medical consent realm, but I’m sure there are people smarter than me who could work out something. Perhaps when scheduling the procedure, the patient could say, “I don’t sign medical ‘Consent to treat’ forms except on advice of my lawyer. Fax your consent form to him at —— at least 48 hours before the procedure, and he will approve it or make changes.” This will at least put them on notice that any breech of patient consent will be dealt with by a trained malpractice lawyer, not the patient himself.
Actually, waiting to know how to address these concerns a moment of medical emergency is exactly the wrong time to try to learn. Learn now what you can expect and demand of your doctors, and practice it routinely, so you're ready when you need it most. That's the discipline part.
Why do you think they use these pads to sign in the hospital and doctors offices, you never see the real information on there, your told to sign in a hurried situation like an emergency, surgery, office visit called your name. They know what they are doing, setting us up to be taken advantage of, not really knowing what you’re signing anymore.
agree. those pads are good only for bird cageliner. One must TALK to the patient in detail about their specific issue.
WOW a good doctor who thinks that’s important thank you Dr.
As the citizen has virtually few rights, (or many that are protected) at the opposite end is the government who reserves the right to freely murder its citizens with no culpability. Make a million page constitution and then find a way to fully enforce it. Not possible. The enforcers can always be corrupted. Even the most saintly among us can be corrupted. And machines can never be trustworthy. So who is gonna be the ultimate un-corruptable authority? God perhaps but he doesn't always work in a timely manner.
Consent is sacrosanct. But what do you do when the individual with (presumably) agency defends the right of authorities to abridge it as we saw with Covid 'because emergency?'
Nuremberg is crystal clear to us but not so much to the public at large it appears. How many times have we heard people say, 'there was a choice. And that choice came with a consequence' - notably losing one's career or employment. This is where we get into the messy part of how authorities manipulate the public into a Hobson's Choice.
This is an issue that will come up again because the rhetoric coming out of the expert class wasn't 'what did we get wrong and why?' but 'we need to lock down sooner and harder'. This signals to me they're more than ready to shred Nuremberg to permanent bits.
Covid showed their hand. And it was demonic and bad. I told hospital to shove it. I asked to or three questions of the Pathologist pushing the Program at Methodist Dallas and he was clueless. I quietly said no and left.
Superb Nuremberg consent comments. As a cardiac surgeon trained by DeBakey.. we learned how to talk to patients solid. He personally made rounds.. made sure interpreters were around. He spoke French, some Arabic and English. As Cardiac resident I spoke Spanish, German okay, and eventually learned some arabic. So sorry there are no more Dr DeBakeys to teach the young'uns.
Dr Bob Feldtman. Texas
Excellent article. Here is a helpful form to file with your providers and bring to the hospital: https://idonotconsentform.com/