John Locke Tacit Consent

Consent is defined by NHS Choices (2010) as: "the principle that a person must give

According to the Oxford Dictionary consent is defined as ‘giving permission for something to happen or agreeing to do something’. They define confidentiality as ‘entrusted with private information and if something is intended to be kept secret or in confidence’ (Soanes and Hawker, 2005). As a healthcare professional consent and confidentiality are in place as protective vices, by gaining consent and keeping a patients confidentiality it protects both the patient and the healthcare professional. There are three types of consent: Verbal consent, consent in writing and implied consent. Depending on the situation each type of consent may not be acceptable. For example if a procedure is putting a patient at risk, is complex or invasive for example an operation, written consent is

In their article, “The Concept of Informed Consent,” Faden and Beauchamp give two varying definitions of informed consent, namely sense one and sense two. Sense one is defined as autonomous authorization, meaning that the patient or subject agrees and then gives authority to move forward with a proposal (Vaughn 191). The authors give four conditions that have to be met for informed consent to be recognized: the patient has to understand the information presented to her, there should be no manipulation or coercion, and she has to intentionally give her authorization (Vaughn 191). Faden and Beauchamp also note that the fourth condition, where the patient gives her authorization, is pivotal in this sense since it differentiates autonomous authorization

The process of establishing consent will vary according to an individual’s assessed capacity to consent.

In the Second Treatise of Government, John Locke argues that the authority of a legitimate political regime is based on the consent of free, equal, rational and reasonable persons. Locke differentiates between two forms of consent - express and tacit. Express consent is when an individual openly articulates a willingness to join the government. This makes the individual a perpetual citizen / the individual incorporates their person into the commonwealth. Those who have given express consent are unalterably subject to society and are never again at liberty as in the state of nature.

Consent can be delivered in a numerous amounts of ways. It can be provided verbally, in script, or implied by behaviour or actions(Ruth Townsend, 2014).

Consent- this is where individual volunteers to give consent to the police officers to enter the premises. An example of this type of exception can Officer Roberto knocks on the door for an aggravated battery assault charge. This suspects girlfriend opens the door the officer asks if he may come in to see if the suspect is around she agrees to let him in.

Consent is the informed agreement to an action and/or decision. Permission for something to happen or agreement to do something.

In my opinion and people will generally agree that it is inescapable we are residing in a particular state since birth, by considering Locke’s view, it seems to imply that by living under the state, you automatically consent to the government and the "enjoyments" of benefits such as the public goods I mentioned previously are regarded as a sign of tacit consent. Nonetheless, children may not have understood the terms of consent; therefore giving consent at this stage would seem inappropriate. Furthermore, regardless of whether individuals have understood what giving consent involves, dissent seems to be difficult to express as it would mean forfeiting ownership of land and right to use public goods, etc. or as Hume (1748) puts it Can we seriously say that a poor peasant or artisan has a free choice to leave his country, when he knows no foreign language or manners, and lives from day to day, by the small wages which he acquires? These consequences are detrimental to the individual, since without housing, healthcare etc. we are unable to fulfill basic human needs. Therefore, Locke’s suggestion certainly does not satisfy any of the five

Dimond (2009) and NHS choices (2016) explained consent as the process involving a person giving their approval to accept or refuse a treatment or interventions, after receiving detailed information from a health care professional about the risk or benefits of the procedure. In order for consent to be deemed valid, it needs to be given voluntarily without any influence or pressure from either a family member or clinician. In addition, the capacity of the person is important when giving consent and the ability to process the given information and make a decision. Tingle &Cribb (2014) agree, emphasizing that the autonomy of the person giving

As per Beal & Lewis, 2014 Informed consent is a process of education and the correct education is a key to the ability to provide consent.

Actual consent is a form of consent that is spoken verbally or is known between both parties that consent has been given. In this model of consent, formal legal and informal consent coincide. Formal consent avoids confusion and is definitive. Some examples of this could be: an injury waiver for a ski trip, the person signing the document is giving consent that they will not be responsible for any injury incurred during the time designated within the document. Permission given for physicians to prescribe drugs or carry out medical procedures could also be an excellent example of formal

In defining political legitimacy, many theorists put forth a distinct set of values that frame their view on the authorities’ right to rule and citizen’s obligation to follow. Theorists such as Hobbes and Locke, both of their account on political legitimacy might look quite similar at first glance, because each theorized about the nature of mankind and the right political systems that would meet the needs of individuals. However, in Hobbes’ perspective, political authority does not pre-exist in individual’s state of nature, rather, it is created by the social contract and serves to ensure self-preservation which is threatened in a state of nature. In contrast, Locke thought that the social contract does not create authority, but that political authority is embodied in individuals and pre-exists in the state of nature, all individuals thus have the moral obligation to respect those rights made by authorities. In my point of view, Locke’s idea sounds more compelling than that of Hobbes’, because it allows individuals to have their own liberties free from an oppressive sovereign and prevents danger posed by absolute freedom.

To have a legitimate government, the citizens need to have explicit consent as advocated by Locke. In Locke’s view of human nature, the people are free, but they enter the social contract in order to solve minor inconveniences and have protection of property rights through explicit consent. He goes into depth on distinguishing the difference between tacit and explicit consent; his preference of explicit consent to choose a leader is rooted in his belief of maintaining equality by giving every person an active role in voicing their feelings. Locke claims, “explicit consent of a man

Consent must be clear and recognizable from other things and given in a comprehensive and effectively open frame, utilizing clear and plain language. It must be as simple to pull back assent as it is to allow it.