Interview: Daniel P. Sulmasy on informed consent
Daniel P. Sulmasy is the Kilbride-Clinton Professor of Medicine and Ethics in the Department of Medicine and Divinity School at the University of Chicago, where he serves as Associate Director of the MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics and as Director of the Program on Medicine and Religion. He is also a member of the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (PCSBI). Professor Sulmasy has written numerous books on topics related to bioethics, and published many articles in bioethics and medical ethics journals.
In this exclusive interview with BioEdge, Professor Sulmasy shared his thoughts on the complex notion of informed consent.
Xavier Symons: Some academics deride the ‘fetishization’ of informed consent or the ‘cult of consent’. What’s going on? Most of us see it as our greatest safeguard.
I understand the sentiment, but informed consent is still critically important. Informed consent has become bureaucratized and, unfortunately, therefore equated by many health care professionals with merely obtaining a signature on a form. Too few practitioners take consent to be a process and a serious moral obligation.
While this can also be true in the research setting, I also think too many ethicists and researchers view informed consent as a sufficient justification for enrolling in human experimentation, and that is also misguided. Some experiments are just too risky or too scientifically flawed to justify doing them even if subjects do consent. These days, patients need more than ever to be involved in their care. The informed consent process is the entrée to their involvement.
The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.