Theories of consent
BMJ 1998; 317 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.317.7168.1313 (Published 07 November 1998) Cite this as: BMJ 1998;317:1313
- Priscilla Alderson, reader in sociology,
- Christopher Goodey, research officer
- Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London, London WC1H ONS
- Correspondence to: Dr Alderson
This is the third in a series of six articles on the importance of theories and values in health research
Series editor: Priscilla Alderson
Consent is understood differently by various disciplines and professions, and also in various theoretical models.1 In this article we review the advantages and limitations of theories about real consent, constructed consent, functionalist and critical consent, and postmodern choice. The article shows how an analysis of theories can clarify practical knowledge about the advantages of and problems in obtaining consent, which will help everyday practice and research.
Summary points
Consent is understood and discussed in contradictory ways when people rely on different theoretical models
Positivism assumes that there is real consent in the factual exchange of medicolegal information
Social constructionism shows how consent can be a complex, ambiguous process, not a simple event
Functionalists see consent as a formality, whereas critical theorists see it as a vital protection
Postmodern theories illuminate the confusions that arise when choice itself is assumed to matter more than any of the options chosen
Consent is too complex to be explained by any one theoretical model
Real consent
Positivism distinguishes factual concepts defined through dichotomies: informed/ignorant, competent/incompetent, free choice/coercion. Medicine, psychology, analytical philosophy, 2 3 and law 4 5 tend to assume positivist concepts of consent. The appropriate information, including percentage risks, for obtaining informed consent is treated almost as a “thing” which doctors give to patients. It is assessed by checking how patients recall and recount standard details of the information they have been given.
Positivist surveys dominate research about consent; mainly they measure information given. The essence of consent (patients' thoughts, feelings, and values as they evaluate information and make and express their decision) is far harder to observe or record—and too subjective and elusive to count as hard data. Problems in real …
Log in
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Subscribe from £173 *
Subscribe and get access to all BMJ articles, and much more.
* For online subscription
Access this article for 1 day for:
£38 / $45 / €42 (excludes VAT)
You can download a PDF version for your personal record.