Informed Consent (Did You Give Yours?)

The primary offense that is resulting from everyone hearing the voices, music and other sounds/noises is that they are hearing them via a method other than their ears. The state of Delaware allowed the activation of an advanced experimental weapons system which subjected everyone to experimentation and thereby violated the Constitution and international agreements and treaties. Was anyone informed prior to its activation that they would be involved in program that was experimental and was their written informed consent obtained? If not then the law was broken and those responsible can be prosecuted. If those men who lost their lives as a result of being coerced into self harm were notified in advanced then it is highly unlikely that they would have fallen victim to the urgings of the perps (guards) who were at the controls. The Nuremberg Code, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,  the Helsinki Declaration, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the National Research Act are just a few of the safeguards and guidelines that have been implemented to protect Human Beings from being used as test subjects without their knowledge or consent and they have been agreed to by the United States but are openly ignored by governmental agencies who are doing the experimentation on citizens and non citizens with and without their knowledge.  So when you hear the music, voices or sounds intercranially, have the artificially induced dreams, the sudden itching on your head or elsewhere and/or see visual images that you know you should not be able to see ponder this, Did I give them my written informed consent to subject me to these different effects and sensations? Since you did not sign on for this then your civil rights are being violated and we know beyond the shadow of a doubt that the state of Delaware and it's Department of Corrections are responsible and need to let us know which agency they activated this for. We also did not agree to allow the Department of Corrections  to receive more than $13,000,000 of our tax money and not spend it as it was designated. If Stan Taylor had automated what he said then Jermaine Wilson would be alive as well as a number of other young men who were subjected to the misuse of this system and consequently suffered the lost of their lives.       Dannie Moore          

A. obtain informed consent from all human subjects;
B. inform human subjects of the identity of the sponsoring agency;
C. inform the subject that the project involves classified research;
D. obtain approval from an independent panel that reviews the projects scientific merit, risk-benefit tradeoffs and ensures that the human subjects have enough information to make an informed consent; and 
E. maintain permanent records of the panes deliberation and consent procedure.
***********************************************************************

This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please improve this article by introducing more precise citations where appropriate."Informed Consent" redirects here. For the House episode, see Informed Consent (House). For the website, see Informed Consent (website).

Tort law

Part of the common law series

Intentional torts

Assault · Battery False imprisonmentIntentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED)

Property torts

Trespass (land · chattels) Conversion Detinue · Replevin · Trover

Defenses

Consent · Necessity Defense of: (Self · Others · Property)

Negligence

Duty of care · Standard of care Proximate cause · Res ipsa loquitur Calculus of negligence Rescue doctrine · Duty to rescue

Specific typesNegligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED)Employment-related · Entrustment Malpractice (legal · medical)

Liability torts

Product liability Ultrahazardous activity

Nuisance

Public nuisance Rylands v. Fletcher

Dignitary torts

Defamation · Invasion of privacy False light · Breach of confidence Abuse of process Malicious prosecution Alienation of affections · Seduction

Economic torts

Fraud · Tortious interference Conspiracy · Restraint of trade

Liability, defences, remedies

Comparative / contributory negligence Last clear chance · Eggshell skull Vicarious liability · Volenti non fit injuria Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Neutral reportage · Damages Injunction · Torts and conflict of laws

Duty to visitors

Trespassers · Licensees · Invitees Attractive nuisance

Other common law areas

Contracts · Criminal law · Evidence Property · Wills, trusts and estates

Portals

Law

v • d • e

Informed consent is a legal condition whereby a person can be said to have given consent based upon a clear appreciation and understanding of the facts, implications and future consequences of an action. In order to give informed consent, the individual concerned must have adequate reasoning faculties and be in possession of all relevant facts at the time consent is given. Impairments to reasoning and judgement which would make it impossible for someone to give informed consent include such factors as severemental retardation, severe mental illness, intoxication, severe sleep deprivation, Alzheimer's disease, or being in a coma.

Some acts cannot legally take place because of a lack of informed consent. In cases where an individual is considered unable to give informed consent, another person is generally authorized to give consent on his behalf, e.g., parents or legal guardians of a child and caregivers for the mentally ill. However, if a severely injured person is brought to hospital in an unconscious state and no-one is available to give informed consent, doctors will give whatever treatment is necessary to save his life (according to theHippocratic oath), which might involve major surgery, e.g., amputation.

In cases where an individual is provided insufficient information to form a reasoned decision, serious ethical issues arise. Such cases in a clinical trial in medical research are anticipated and prevented by anethics committee or Institutional Review Board.

[edit]Assessment of consent

Informed consent can be complex to evaluate, because neither expressions of consent, nor expressions of understanding of implications, necessarily mean that full adult consent was in fact given, nor that full comprehension of relevant issues is internally digested. Consent may be implied within the usual subtleties of human communication, rather than explicitly negotiated verbally or in writing. In some cases consent cannot legally be possible, even if the person protests he does indeed understand and wish. There are also structured instruments for evaluating capacity to give informed consent, although no ideal instrument presently exists.

There is thus always a degree to which informed consent must be assumed or inferred based upon observation, or knowledge, or legal reliance. This especially is the case in sexual or relational issues. In medical or formal circumstances explicit agreement by means of signature which may normally be relied upon legally, regardless of actual consent, is the norm.

Brief examples of each of the above:

1. A person may verbally agree to something from fear, perceived social pressure, or psychological difficulty in asserting his true feelings. The person requesting the action may honestly be unaware of this and believe the consent is genuine, and rely upon it. Consent is expressed, but not internally given.
2. A person may state he understands the implications of some action, as part of his consent, but in fact has failed to appreciate the possible consequences fully and later deny the validity of his consent for this reason. Understanding needed for informed consent is stated to be present but is in fact (through ignorance) not present.
3. A person may move from friendship to sexual contact on the basis of body language and apparent receptivity, but very few people on a date that results in sexual contact have explicitly asked the other if his or her consent is informed, if he does in fact fully understand what is implied, and all potential conditions or results. Informed consent is implied (or assumed unless disproved) but not stated explicitly.
4. A person below the