Abstract
Several attempts have been made to transfer the concept of informed consent from medical and research ethics to dealing with affected groups in other areas such as engineering, land use planning, and business management. It is argued that these attempts are unsuccessful since the concept of informed consent is inadequate for situations in which groups of affected persons are dealt with collectively (rather than individually, as in clinical medicine). There are several reasons for this. The affected groups from which informed consent is sought cannot be identified with sufficient precision. Informed consent is associated with individual veto power, but it does not appear realistic to give veto power to all individuals who are affected for instance by an engineering project. Most importantly, the concept of informed consent puts focus on the public’s acceptance of ready-made proposals rather than on its participation in the decision-making process as a whole, which includes the development of alternatives for the decision. Therefore, the concept of informed consent is not applicable to a company’s relations with groups and collectives. It may, however, be applicable to a company’s relations with individual persons such as customers and employees.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
S. Cohen (1995) ArticleTitle‘Stakeholders and Consent’ Business and Professional Ethics Journal 14 IssueID1 3–16
Condorcet: [1793] 1847, “Plan de Constitution, Presenté à la convention nationale les 15 et 16 février 1793”, Oeuvres, vol. 12, pp. 333–415.
M. English (1991) ArticleTitle‘Siting, Justice, and Conceptions of the Good’ Public Affairs Quarterly 5 IssueID1 1–17
R. Faden T. Beauchamp (1986) A History and Theory of Informed Consent Oxford University Press NY, OUP
J. Fisher (2001) ArticleTitle‘Lessons for Business Ethics from Bioethics’ Journal of Business Ethics 34 15–24 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1011916709062
N. Fotion (1987) ArticleTitle‘Simmons and the Concept of Consent: Commentary on Consent and Fairness in Planning Land Use’ Business and Professional Ethics Journal 6 IssueID2 21–24
R. E. Freeman (1984) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach Ballinger Boston
S. M. Grunberg W. T. Cefalu (2003) ArticleTitle‘The Integral Role of Clinical Research in Clinical Care’ New England Journal of Medicine 348 1386–1388 Occurrence Handle10.1056/NEJMsb025342
S. O. Hansson (2003) ArticleTitle‘Ethical Criteria of Risk Acceptance’ Erkenntnis 59 291–309 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1026005915919
T. A. Long (1983) ArticleTitle‘Informed Consent and Engineering: an Essay Review’ Business and Professional Ethics Journal 3 59–66
M. W. Martin R. Schinzinger (1983) Ethics in Engineering McGraw-Hill New York
J. Rowan (1998) ArticleTitle‘Informed Consent as an Ethical Principle for Business’ Business and Professional Ethics Journal 17 IssueID1–2 95–111
R. Schinzinger M. W. Martin (1983) ArticleTitle‘Commentary: Informed Consent in Engineering and Medicine’ Business and Professional Ethics Journal 3 67–78
K. Shrader-Frechette (1993) ArticleTitle‘Consent and Nuclear Waste Disposal’ Public Affairs Quarterly 7 IssueID4 363–377
J. Simmons (1987) ArticleTitle‘Consent and Fairness in Planning Land Use’ Business and Professional Ethics Journal 6 IssueID2 5–20
H. J. Buren ParticleVan SuffixIII (2001) ArticleTitle‘If Fairness is the Problem, is␣Consent the Solution? Integrating ISCT and Stakeholder Theory’ Business Ethics Quarterly 11 IssueID3 481–499
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hansson, S.O. Informed Consent Out of Context. J Bus Ethics 63, 149–154 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-2584-z
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-2584-z