Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Informed Consent Law, Ethics, and Practice: From Infancy to Reflective Adolescence

  • Published:
HEC Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Salgo v. Leland Stanford Jr. University Board of Trustees, 317 P.2d 170 (Cal. Ct. App. 1957).

  2. Schloendorff v. The Society of the New York Hospital, 105 N.E. 92 (N.Y. 1914).

  3. Faden R and Beauchamp TL. A history and theory of informed consent. New York: Oxford University Press; 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Engelhardt HT Jr. The foundations of bioethics, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wolf SM. Toward a systematic theory of informed consent in managed care. Houston Law Review. 1999; 35: 1631–81.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Krause JH. Reconceptualizing informed consent in an era of health care cost containment. Iowa Law Review. 1999; 85: 261–386.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cooper EB. Testing for genetic traits: The need for a new legal doctrine of informed consent. Maryland Law Review. 1999; 58: 346–422.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kurtz SF. The law of informed consent: From ‘doctor is right’ to ‘patient has rights.’ Syracuse Law Review. 2000; 50: 1243.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Capron AM. The once and future silent world. Foreword to The silent world of doctor and patient, by Jay Katz. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Katz J. The silent world of doctor and patient. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Schuck PH. Rethinking informed consent. Yale Law Journal. 1994; 103: 899–959.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wear S. Informed consent: Patient autonomy and clinician beneficence within health care, 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Natanson v. Kline, 350 P.2d 1093 (Kan. 1960).

  14. Canterbury v. Spence, 464 F.2d 772 (D.C. Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1064 (1972).

  15. Schneider CE. The practice of autonomy: Patients, doctors, and medical decisions. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Jonsen AR. The birth of bioethics. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Beauchamp TL and Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics, 5th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Morreim EH. Balancing act: The new medical ethics of medicine’s new economics. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hall MA. Law, medicine, and trust. Stanford Law Review. 2002; 55: 463–527.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sulmasy DP. Informed consent without autonomy. Fordham Urban Law Journal. 2002; 30: 207–220.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cohen MH and Ruggie MC. Integrating complementary and alternative medical therapies in conventional medical settings: Legal quandaries and potential policy models. University of Cincinnati Law Review. 2003; 72: 671–728.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gatter R. Walking the talk of trust in human subjects research: The challenge of regulating financial conflicts of interest. Emory Law Journal. 2003; 52: 327–401.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Koski G. Research, regulations, and responsibility: Confronting the compliance myth — a reaction to professor Gatter. Emory Law Journal. 2003; 52: 403–416.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Benbow S. Conflict of interest: Financial incentives and informed consent in human subject research. Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy. 2003; 17: 181–215.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Goldner JA. Dealing with conflicts of interest in biomedical research: IRB oversight as the next best solution to the abolitionist approach. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 2000; 28: 379–404.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kuszler PC. Curing conflicts of interest in clinical research: Impossible dreams and harsh realities. Widener Law Symposium. 2001; 8: 115–152.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hall MA. A theory of economic informed consent. Georgia Law Review. 1997; 31: 511–526.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hall TS. Bargaining with Hippocrates: Managed care and the doctor-patient relationship. South Carolina Law Review. 2003; 54: 689–740.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rosenfeld B. The psychology of competence and informed consent: Understanding decision-making with regard to clinical research. Fordham Urban Law Journal. 2002; 30: 173–185.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Gatter R. Informed consent law and the forgotten duty of physician inquiry. Loyola University Chicago Law Journal. 2000; 31: 557–597.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hartman RG. Adolescent decisional autonomy for medical care: Physician perceptions and practices. University of Chicago Law School Roundtable. 2001; 8: 87–134.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Fisher CB. A goodness-of-fit ethic for informed consent. Fordham Urban Law Journal. 2002; 30: 159–171.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ali V. Consent forms as part of the informed consent process: Moving away from ‘medical Miranda.’ Hastings Law Journal. 2003; 54: 1575–1591.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Ziker D. Reviving informed consent: Using risk perception in clinical trials. Duke Law & Technology Review. 2003; 15.

  35. Rosoffs AJ. Informed consent in the electronic age. American Journal of Law & Medicine. 1999; 25: 367.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Brensilver P. E-formed consent: Evaluating the interplay between interactive technology and informed consent. George Washington Law Review. 2002; 70: 613–631.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Heinemann RA. Pushing the limits of informed consent: Johnson v. Kokemoor and physician-specific disclosure. Wisconsin Law Review. 1997; 1079–1081.

Download references

Authors
  1. Roberta M. Berry J.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Berry, R.M. Informed Consent Law, Ethics, and Practice: From Infancy to Reflective Adolescence. HEC Forum 17, 64–81 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-005-4951-7

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-005-4951-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation