Lynn A. Jansen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Informed consent is a central concept in the literature on the ethics of clinical care and human subjects research. There is a broad consensus that ethical practice in these domains requires the informed consent of patients and subjects. The requirements of informed consent in these domains, however, are matters of considerable controversy. Some argue that the requirements of informed consent have been inflated, others that they have not been taken seriously enough. This essay argues that both sides are partly right. To advance this argument, the essay distinguishes a general doctrine of informed consent from what it characterizes as models of informed consent. A general doctrine articulates a set of requirements for informed consent and then adjusts these requirements to fit the context in which they are to be applied. In contrast, different models of informed consent impose different requirements in different contexts. The essay contends that different models of informed consent are needed for clinical care and clinical research. It outlines these two models, articulates the rationale for distinguishing them, and considers and rebuts the objection that clinical care and clinical research are too deeply intertwined in contemporary medicine for the models approach to apply to them.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)50-71
Number of pages22
JournalSocial Philosophy and Policy
Issue number2
StatePublished - 2021
Externally publishedYes


  • exploitation
  • informed consent
  • research ethics
  • therapeutic misconception

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Philosophy
  • Social Sciences(all)


Dive into the research topics of 'TWO MODELS OF INFORMED CONSENT'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this