Informed Consent Part IV: It's More Than Just Signing A Consent Form

This article was posted with permission from Suzanne Hamner.

Disclaimer – This is for informational and educational purpose only and does not constitute legal or medical advice.

Now that we have covered aspects of Informed Consent in Parts I – III, the focus shifts to how we reclaim our right to informed consent and prevent it from being usurped, negated, or denied.  Always remember, this does not pertain to life-threatening individual health emergencies.

First, we have to understand that informed consent is individually centered, not mass centered. It is devoid of politics, political party, agenda, or silence. It is an active process that cannot be assumed, presumed, implied, or supposed but distinctly exerted by the individual. It is a process that cannot be ethically, morally, or legally negated nor can it be voted away by a majority/minority or swept away by majority/minority opinion. Informed consent cannot be usurped or denied for the “greater good of the majority” nor can it be undermined based upon demographics. Moreover, what a physician or medical industrial terrorist believes is good for you does not override informed consent.

• Activate Your Own Stem Cells & Reverse The Aging Process – Choose “Select & Save” OR Join, Brand Partner & Select Silver To Get Wholesale Prices
• Get your Vitamin B17 & Get 10% Off With Promo Code TIM
• How To Protect Yourself From 5G, EMF & RF Radiation
• Protect Your Income & Retirement Assets With Gold & Silver
• Grab This Bucket Of Heirloom Seeds & Get Free Shipping With Promo Code TIM
• Here’s A Way You Can Stockpile Food For The Future
• Stockpile Your Ammo & Save $15 On Your First Order
• Preparing Also Means Detoxifying – Here’s One Simple Way To Detoxify

Second, we need to start looking at everything through the lens of the right to informed consent. Chemtrails were briefly discussed in Part II. Who is spraying the skies with harmful chemicals – the government, private industry, private individuals, etc.? Was anything brought forward to the public about it? I don’t recall any information being given to the people about it or the people being allowed to object (Exodus 19-24).

Remember the big campaign pushed on the people for spraying DDT? Do a search using the terms “DDT spraying campaign video” and you will see listed multiple videos from the 1940s of the harmful chemical being sprayed on people. There is also one about the “paint on” version called Pestroy, which contained a higher concentration of DDT than was “government approved”. It was only later that we learned how harmful it was. But, ask yourself, “did those individuals, many children, give informed consent/informed consent permission for this”? Next, do a search using the terms “harmful DDT” and a list of articles will appear confirming the adverse health outcomes – one housed at the National Institute of Health (NIH) Pub Med Library. Particularly, read this article about DDT. This highlights the importance of informed consent.

Who paid the price for the damage done to individuals by DDT (Exodus 21:12ff)?  Who is going to pay the price for damage done to individuals because of chemtrails, harmful food additives, GMO foods and insects, vaccines, and other toxins emitted into the environment daily?

Third, we cannot delegate informed consent to any elected individual, appointed individual or any entity unless we give those individuals and/or entity legal guardianship. If your idea of informed consent is “I’ll do what the majority decides”, you would be wise to reevaluate your stance on informed consent.

Once we adopt the view of passing things through the lens of informed consent, one can begin to take steps to ensure informed consent is upheld. However, it is up to each individual to exercise and demand informed consent regardless of circumstances.

Let’s start with medical informed consent with which most individuals are accustomed to dealing. For any medication, injection, procedure, or other medical intervention, including non-pharmaceutical interventions, follow the process detailed in Part I to receive informed consent. The process is contained below.

The process of informed consent occurs when communication between a patient and physician results in the patient’s authorization or agreement to undergo a specific medical intervention. In seeking a patient’s informed consent (or the consent of the patient’s surrogate if the patient lacks decision-making capacity or declines to participate in making decisions), physicians should:

1. Assess the patient’s ability to understand relevant medical information and the implications of treatment alternatives and to make an independent, voluntary decision.
2. Present relevant information accurately and sensitively, in keeping with the patient’s preferences for receiving medical information. The physician should include information about:
   1. the diagnosis (when known);
   2. the nature and purpose of recommended interventions;
   3. the burdens, risks, and expected benefits of all options, including forgoing treatment.
3. Document the informed consent conversation and the patient’s (or surrogate’s) decision in the medical record in some manner. When the patient/surrogate has provided specific written consent, the consent form should be included in the record.

In emergencies, when a decision must be made urgently, the patient is not able to participate in decision making, and the patient’s surrogate is not available, physicians may initiate treatment without prior informed consent. In such situations, the physician should inform the patient/surrogate at the earliest opportunity and obtain consent for ongoing treatment in keeping with these guidelines.

Informed consent is more than just saying “yes” to a recommendation or signing your name to a consent form. The NIH paper goes a bit further in the process for informed consent to include a legal standard.

The patient must be competent to make a voluntary decision about whether to undergo the procedure or intervention.  Informed consent is both an ethical and legal obligation of medical practitioners in the US and originates from the patient’s right to direct what happens to their body. Implicit in providing informed consent is an assessment of the patient’s understanding, rendering an actual recommendation, and documentation of the process. The Joint Commission requires documentation of all the elements of informed consent “in a form, progress notes or elsewhere in the record.” The following are the required elements for documentation of the informed consent discussion: (1) the nature of the procedure, (2) the risks and benefits and the procedure, (3) reasonable alternatives, (4) risks and benefits of alternatives, and (5) assessment of the patient’s understanding of elements 1 through 4.

It is the obligation of the provider to make it clear that the patient is participating in the decision-making process and avoid making the patient feel forced to agree to with the provider. The provider must make a recommendation and provide their reasoning for said recommendation.

Adequacy of Informed Consent

The required standard for informed consent is determined by the state. The three acceptable legal approaches to adequate informed consent are (1) Subjective standard: What would this patient need to know and understand to make an informed decision? (2) Reasonable patient standard: What would the average patient need to know to be an informed participant in the decision? (3) Reasonable physician standard: What would a typical physician say about this procedure? [Emphasis Mine. States are charged with enactment of informed consent legislation, not the federal government as indicated in The Constitution for the united States of America, Article IV, Section 4 and the Tenth Amendment.]

Many states use the “reasonable patient standard” because it focuses on what a typical patient would need to know to understand the decision at hand. However, it is the sole obligation of the provider to determine which approach is appropriate for a given situation.

It is always advisable to discuss decisions with family members, if one cannot be present to assist you at the time, before making a final decision. It is best if a family member goes with you to medical appointments and particularly if entering the hospital system.

Remember, informed consent is an active process that cannot be assumed, presumed, supposed, or implied.

Know that most physicians, nurses, and medical workers will relay to you the most common adverse events, which are usually mild or moderate. Rarely, are patients ever given more serious adverse events or reactions. Be prepared to ask questions. Some sample questions are:

1. 1. What is the benefit of this intervention – use medication, injection, procedure, or non-pharmaceutical intervention named by physician.
   2. What is the risk of this intervention – again, use what is named by the physician.
   3. What are the side effects.
   4. What are the adverse effects.
   5. Will this interact with other medications/interventions currently in play.
   6. Will this interact with any supplements.
   7. What is the risk/benefit ratio.
   8. Do you have a package insert that we can go over together. (when medications/injections are involved.
   9. How long do I need to take this.
   10. What do I do in case of a reaction.
   11. How long is the recovery time – for procedures.
   12. What occurs next if there is a problem – for procedures.
   13. Is this necessary.
   14. What will happen if I do not take it or have the procedure.
   15. What are the alternative treatments.

These are not all inclusive, but samples. Questions asked will depend on the circumstance. You also have the right to a second opinion from another professional if you are still in doubt.

Let me give you a real life scenario to help you. When my mother was in the hospital during the height of CONVid-1984 for sepsis, CT scans determined that she had some “debris” break off from the damaged heart valve enter her brain and cause blindness in the right eye. Subsequent diagnostic tests determined she had a bit of “blockage” in the carotid artery on the right side of her neck. A nurse working with the neurology team entered to explain what was discovered and recommended the statin drug Crestor. I was present and listened to her explain what the drug did, why it was needed, and the side effects. When she was finished, I asked, “Why did you not cover more serious adverse effects and events and interactions with other medications”? It was a reasonable question, genuinely asked because that is part of informed consent. Moreover, as a nurse, I knew the more serious adverse events and drug interactions, which should have been presented. The nurse responded, “Well, if I have to cover all of that, I would have to tell you that water can cause death.”

This was an inappropriate response – one I would term a “smarty pants sarcastic remark” – issued for one purpose only, which was to keep me quiet. It didn’t work.  So, she got one right back that shut her up.

The point is when dealing with those in the medical field, you will receive these types of responses because they are not used to dealing with having to provide true informed consent. You may experience the individual becoming frustrated, exasperated, angry, impatient, surly, sarcastic, flippant, and in some instances coercive, threatening, and less than responsive.

Remain calm and reiterate that you are asking in order to make an informed decision, which you cannot make without this information. If the answers are not to your satisfaction, ask the physician, nurse, or medical worker to review the package insert with you (medications/injections) or review the procedure step by step in terms you can understand. Gently remind the individual it is your right to have informed consent and by ethics, morals, and law they are required to obtain it using the accepted informed consent process.

If you refuse based upon informed consent, be prepared to face a bit of harshness from the individual or a threat of not being able to continue to be your provider. Be calm but firm in reiterating your decision. Of course, it is difficult to do this. A member of my family gets frustrated when this occurs and blurts, “I said I’m not doing it so just shut up!” It works, but I would caution against being that aggressive.

If at the time you cannot decide, let the individual know and tell them you would like time to think about it.  When it concerns your health, do not make hasty decisions (Proverbs 28:25).  Do not make a decision based on fear (2 Timothy 1:7).  Take the time to explore options.

In order to obtain informed consent, the full process of informed consent has to be completed. Let’s look at the process again with substitutions made to cover the education component.

The first thing to understand is the parent’s right to direct and determine what their children are taught (Deuteronomy 6:1-10). Remember the required documentation necessary for informed consent.

1. The nature of “teaching the ideology”;
2. The risks and benefits of teaching the ideology;
3. Reasonable alternatives;
4. Risks and benefits of the alternatives; and,
5. Assessment of the parents’ understanding of 1 through 4.

Now we come to the acceptable approaches for adequate informed consent.

1. Subjective standard: What would this parent need to know and understand about this ideology in the curriculum to make an informed decision?
2. Reasonable parent standard: What would the average parent need to know to be an informed participant in the decision to teach this ideology in the curriculum?
3. Reasonable teacher standard: What would a typical teacher say about this ideology in the curriculum and would they want their child exposed to it?

As with the medical informed consent, the reasonable parent standard should apply. Remember, you can take the same sample questions for medical informed consent, change it a bit, and apply it to education, government actions, and any scenario where informed consent is required.

Exercising your right to informed consent takes a bit of practice and perseverance when dealing with a system that has foregone the entire process to obtain it.

In the next part of Informed Consent, we will deal with collateral damage and unintended consequences.

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media