Saturday, June 09, 2007

Informed Consent And Malformed Consent

by Seth Cooper - June 8th, 2007 - The Ameircan Thinker

For most of us, it's self-evident that medical professionals must obtain the informed consent of persons before their organs or other physical body parts may be removed for transplant or experimentation. Individual humans have rights and responsibilities vested in their own respective bodies. Only where human liberty prevails do we have the space to make the moral choice of giving up part of our own bodies for the well being of others.

Contrast the human liberty to donate one's physical body for beneficent medical purposes with the notion of an affirmative obligation or "duty to donate" one's body. Of course, the very idea of a "duty to donate" is incoherent. No human can ever act freely while under coercion. If humans were to have an affirmative obligation to furnish their own physical bodies to others, we could hardly claim to call our individual bodies our own.

Once again judges are starting to impose their own view of morality on defendants in their courts. This is not about any law. It is about a group of liberal activist judges throwing out the "rule of law" and choosing to determine the outcome of cases based on the "rule of judges".

The notion of an affirmative obligation or "duty to donate" one's body is not just incoherent. It is in fact the first step in an affirmative obligation or "duty to die" when your body is needed by someone else who can provide greater benefit to society by using your body or some part of it. This obligation is the clear rational next step to the Kelo decision that "taking" your property for public use can mean giving your property to someone else to use if they provide greater "benefit to society". According to Kelo, no matter how vague the benefit to "public use", government officials are better able to determine this than you. At least according to the judges. The judges see no need to limit the power of government officials to determine the best use of your land. The next step is clearly the ability to determine the best use of your body. Someone really important needs your liver? Voila, a "duty to die" becomes law.

Such arrogance has led us to the current situation where our courts are a farce and tyranny is the standard of justice.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home