The history in detail...

I guess I should have done this before I gave my opinions,
but I would like to explain a bit about the history of informed consent.

The basic idea of informed consent is that doctors explain to patients
about the treatments that are available -in specific, things such as
the method, the meaning, the effects (good and bad), the dangers,
what is expected to happen afterwards, and the expenses.
They are to explain clearly and adequately, and then recieve an approval.
In other words, doctors inform, and obtain a patient's consent.

There are three big historical trails for this idea.

One is a concept of a court tactic to make the process of explaining to patients
a duty for doctors in the situation of medical malpractice cases increasing.

The second came from the situation that in the early days of heart transplantation,
the surgery was often recognized as a experiment on a human body.
There was a need for doctors to explain things such as the purpose and dangers
of the experiment, and also for patients to give agreement voluntarily.

The third came from the problem that even if a patient knows their own disease,
for example cancer, it would only increase their anxiety if they did not know
about the details of the conditions of their diseases.
There was a need to make a way of guaranteeing the right for patients to be informed.

These three factors lead to the establishment of the idea of informed consent,
in the United States, in the 1970's. It spread very rapidly among advanced countries.
It is said though, that one of the reasons for the spread was that doctors could use
this idea for self-desense in court cases.

In Japan, the concept was adopted in the late 1980's,
but I am having some trouble getting the facts in detail.
I promise to post something about it soon...

Thanks for reading!