A “Dignitary Tort” as a Bridge between the Idea of Informed Consent and the Law of Informed Consent
- 1 January 1988
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Law, Medicine and Health Care
- Vol. 16 (3-4) , 210-218
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720x.1988.tb01948.x
Abstract
More than 30 years have passed since the phrase informed consent was first uttered in a judicial opinion. Jay Katz's own ground-breaking work on informed consent is now more than 10 years old, and the insights of The Silent World of Doctor and Patient are so constantly fresh that it is easy to forget it too was not just recently published. While trying to develop some new thoughts about informed consent for this essay—a task made virtually impossible by Jay's work—I had reviewed an article by Professor Joseph Goldstein, one of Jay's frequent collaborators. Goldstein recounted discovering an index card he had written almost 30 years earlier (ironically for me, the year I was born) containing some notes about Harold Lasswell's work. Not only is law a seamless web, it is a timeless one.Jay's work on informed consent is pervaded by a timeless theme that I wish to address here: how the dignity of the individual, the shining beacon of the idea of informed consent, is sorely neglected in the law of informed consent.Keywords
This publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit:
- GeophysicistsEos, 1985
- Rethinking Intangible Injuries: A Focus on RemedyCalifornia Law Review, 1985
- For Harold Lasswell: Some Reflections on Human Dignity, Entrapment, Informed Consent, and the Plea BargainThe Yale Law Journal, 1975
- Informed Consent in Catastrophic Disease Research and TreatmentUniversity of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1974
- The Right to PrivacyHarvard Law Review, 1890