Pour la bioéthique, le consentement éclairé est un processus dialogique qui, au travers d’un échange d’informations, garantit le respect du droit du patient à l’autodétermination. Or, il est souvent confondu avec le formulaire de consentement éclairé, document signé par le patient ou son responsable légal, à la demande du médecin ou de l’établissement hospitalier, reconnaissant que toutes les informations sur le traitement et ses risques lui ont été fournies. Cette thèse se propose de vérifier dans quelle mesure, pour ce qui est des soins médicaux, l’usage du « formulaire de consentement éclairé » sans ce processus communicatif dialogique dit de « consentement éclairé » suffit, en soi, à déclarer irrecevables les actions en responsabilité civile pour non respect ou manquement au respect du devoir d’expliquer les risques inhérents aux procédures diagnostiques et thérapeutiques. Notre méthode d’investigation s’appuie sur une révision bibliographique et une recherche documentaire des arrêts contenant l’expression « consentement éclairé » (ou un de ses équivalents). Elle examine 60 arrêts de cours de justice d’états brésiliens pour déterminer le profil des actions et vérifier leur résultat. Le test exact de Fisher a également été utilisé pour déterminer l’association entre les variables « utilisation ou non du formulaire » et « recevabilité ou non des demandes ». Il en ressort que, bien qu’aucune norme brésilienne ne réglemente les formes d’expression du consentement éclairé, un fondement juridique a surgi de l’association systématique de l’intitulé de l’Art. 5 de la Constitution fédérale, du Code civil, en particulier de ses Arts.11 à 21 qui protègent les droits de la personnalité, de l’Art. 6-III du code de la consommation, qui dispose des devoirs d’information et de transparence, et du code de déontologie médicale qui exige l’éclaircissement et le consentement préalables du patient ou de son responsable légal (Art. 22) et interdit toute limitation du droit du patient à disposer de lui-même et de son bien-être (Arts. 24 et 31). Les devoirs d’information des médecins intègrent donc le processus de consentement éclairé, dont la violation peut entraîner la responsabilité civile de ce professionnel, à condition qu’existent les présomptions de dommage au patient, de culpabilité du médecin et de rapport causal entre cette culpabilité et le dommage découlant de la violation du devoir d’information sans que rien ne justifie le manquement au devoir du docteur. / O consentimento informado é entendido, pela Bioética, como um processo dialógico que, por meio da troca de informações, garante o respeito à autodeterminação do paciente, sendo, porém, freqüentemente confundido com o Termo de Consentimento Informado, documento assinado pelo paciente ou seus familiares, a pedido do médico ou da instituição hospitalar, dando ciência de ter recebido informação pertinente ao tratamento e aos seus riscos. Esta tese tem como objetivo verificar em que medida o uso do “termo de consentimento informado”, na assistência médica, de forma desacompanhada do processo comunicativo dialógico chamado “consentimento informado” é de per si suficiente para afastar a procedência de demandas judiciais de responsabilidade civil por ausência ou deficiência do dever de informar riscos inerentes aos procedimentos diagnósticos e terapêuticos. Utilizou-se como método de pesquisa a revisão bibliográfica e a pesquisa documental em acórdãos que contém a expressão “consentimento informado”(ou equivalentes). A análise foi realizada sobre uma base de 60 acórdãos de Tribunais de Justiça estaduais para verificar o perfil e resultado das demandas. Também aplicou-se o Teste Exato de Fisher, para medir a associação entre variáveis “uso ou não do termo de consentimento” e “procedência ou improcedência das demandas”. Verificou-se que, embora não haja norma nacional que o regulamente as formas de expressão do consentimento informado, há fundamentação jurídica, decorrente da coligação sistemática entre o Art. 5º, caput, da Constituição Federal; o Código Civil, especialmente nos direitos de personalidade, entre os Arts.11 a 21 do Código Civil, que resguardam os Direitos de Personalidade; o Art. 6, III do Código de Defesa do Consumidor, relativo aos deveres de informação e transparência; e o Código de Ética Médica, que exige o esclarecimento e o consentimento prévios do paciente ou de seu responsável legal (Art. 22) e veda qualquer limitação ao exercício do direito do paciente de decidir livremente sobre sua pessoa ou seu bem-estar (Arts. 24 e 31). Os deveres informativos dos médicos integram o processo de consentimento informado e sua violação pode ter como conseqüência a responsabilidade civil do profissional, desde que verificados os pressupostos do dano ao paciente, da culpa do médico e do nexo causal entre a culpa e o dano decorrente da violação de dever informativo e não haja excludente ao dever. / According to Bioethics, informed consent is a dialogic process that, by means of information sharing, accords respect to patients’ self-determination. However, this is often confused with the Informed Consent Form, which is a document signed by patients and family members at the doctor’s or hospital administrator’s request, confirming that they have received information about the treatment and its risks. This thesis is aimed at checking to what extent the use of the “informed consent form” in medical assistance, unaccompanied by the dialogic communicative process called “informed consent”, is per se sufficient to prevent civil liability claims for absence of or deficiency in the duty to inform people about the risks inherent in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. The adopted research method was bibliographical review and documental investigation into appellate decisions containing the expression “informed consent” (or equivalents). The analysis was conducted based on 60 appellate decisions reached by state Appellate Courts in order to examine the profile and result of claims Fisher's Exact Test was also administered to measure the association between the variables “use or non-use of the “consent form” and the “validity or invalidity of claims”. It was found that, although there are no national rules governing the forms of expression about informed consent, there are legal foundations arising from the systematic link among the head provision of Art. 5 of the Federal Constitution; the Civil Code, especially in reference to personality rights, Articles 11-21 of the Civil Code, which protect the Personality Rights; Art. 6, III of the Consumer Protection Code concerning information and transparence duties; and the Code of Medical Ethics, which requires the clarification and prior consent of the patient or his/her legal guardian (Art. 22) and forbids any limitation to the patient’s right to freely decide on his/her person or well-being (Articles 24 and 31). Doctors’ informative duties are an integral part of the informed consent process and violation thereof might result in the professional’s civil liability if harm to the patient, the doctor’s fault, and the causal relation between the fault and the harm resulting from violation of the informative duty are confirmed and if no duty exclusion mechanism exists.

The therapeutic privilege is a defence in terms of which a doctor may withhold information from a patient if disclosure of such information could harm the patient. This study explores the defence of therapeutic privilege and provides a critical evaluation. A comparative investigation is undertaken, while arguments springing from a variety of disciplines are also incorporated. A number of submissions are made for limiting the ambit of the defence. The main submission is that the therapeutic privilege should comply with all the requirements of the defence of necessity. In addition, it should contain some of the safeguards afforded to the patient by the requirements of the defence of negotiorum gestio so that therapeutic privilege is out of the question if medical treatment is administered against the patient's will, or the doctor has reason to believe (or knows) that the patient will refuse to undergo an intended intervention once properly informed. / Jurisprudence / L.L.M. (Jurisprudence)

Pour la bioéthique, le consentement éclairé est un processus dialogique qui, au travers d’un échange d’informations, garantit le respect du droit du patient à l’autodétermination. Or, il est souvent confondu avec le formulaire de consentement éclairé, document signé par le patient ou son responsable légal, à la demande du médecin ou de l’établissement hospitalier, reconnaissant que toutes les informations sur le traitement et ses risques lui ont été fournies. Cette thèse se propose de vérifier dans quelle mesure, pour ce qui est des soins médicaux, l’usage du « formulaire de consentement éclairé » sans ce processus communicatif dialogique dit de « consentement éclairé » suffit, en soi, à déclarer irrecevables les actions en responsabilité civile pour non respect ou manquement au respect du devoir d’expliquer les risques inhérents aux procédures diagnostiques et thérapeutiques. Notre méthode d’investigation s’appuie sur une révision bibliographique et une recherche documentaire des arrêts contenant l’expression « consentement éclairé » (ou un de ses équivalents). Elle examine 60 arrêts de cours de justice d’états brésiliens pour déterminer le profil des actions et vérifier leur résultat. Le test exact de Fisher a également été utilisé pour déterminer l’association entre les variables « utilisation ou non du formulaire » et « recevabilité ou non des demandes ». Il en ressort que, bien qu’aucune norme brésilienne ne réglemente les formes d’expression du consentement éclairé, un fondement juridique a surgi de l’association systématique de l’intitulé de l’Art. 5 de la Constitution fédérale, du Code civil, en particulier de ses Arts.11 à 21 qui protègent les droits de la personnalité, de l’Art. 6-III du code de la consommation, qui dispose des devoirs d’information et de transparence, et du code de déontologie médicale qui exige l’éclaircissement et le consentement préalables du patient ou de son responsable légal (Art. 22) et interdit toute limitation du droit du patient à disposer de lui-même et de son bien-être (Arts. 24 et 31). Les devoirs d’information des médecins intègrent donc le processus de consentement éclairé, dont la violation peut entraîner la responsabilité civile de ce professionnel, à condition qu’existent les présomptions de dommage au patient, de culpabilité du médecin et de rapport causal entre cette culpabilité et le dommage découlant de la violation du devoir d’information sans que rien ne justifie le manquement au devoir du docteur. / O consentimento informado é entendido, pela Bioética, como um processo dialógico que, por meio da troca de informações, garante o respeito à autodeterminação do paciente, sendo, porém, freqüentemente confundido com o Termo de Consentimento Informado, documento assinado pelo paciente ou seus familiares, a pedido do médico ou da instituição hospitalar, dando ciência de ter recebido informação pertinente ao tratamento e aos seus riscos. Esta tese tem como objetivo verificar em que medida o uso do “termo de consentimento informado”, na assistência médica, de forma desacompanhada do processo comunicativo dialógico chamado “consentimento informado” é de per si suficiente para afastar a procedência de demandas judiciais de responsabilidade civil por ausência ou deficiência do dever de informar riscos inerentes aos procedimentos diagnósticos e terapêuticos. Utilizou-se como método de pesquisa a revisão bibliográfica e a pesquisa documental em acórdãos que contém a expressão “consentimento informado”(ou equivalentes). A análise foi realizada sobre uma base de 60 acórdãos de Tribunais de Justiça estaduais para verificar o perfil e resultado das demandas. Também aplicou-se o Teste Exato de Fisher, para medir a associação entre variáveis “uso ou não do termo de consentimento” e “procedência ou improcedência das demandas”. Verificou-se que, embora não haja norma nacional que o regulamente as formas de expressão do consentimento informado, há fundamentação jurídica, decorrente da coligação sistemática entre o Art. 5º, caput, da Constituição Federal; o Código Civil, especialmente nos direitos de personalidade, entre os Arts.11 a 21 do Código Civil, que resguardam os Direitos de Personalidade; o Art. 6, III do Código de Defesa do Consumidor, relativo aos deveres de informação e transparência; e o Código de Ética Médica, que exige o esclarecimento e o consentimento prévios do paciente ou de seu responsável legal (Art. 22) e veda qualquer limitação ao exercício do direito do paciente de decidir livremente sobre sua pessoa ou seu bem-estar (Arts. 24 e 31). Os deveres informativos dos médicos integram o processo de consentimento informado e sua violação pode ter como conseqüência a responsabilidade civil do profissional, desde que verificados os pressupostos do dano ao paciente, da culpa do médico e do nexo causal entre a culpa e o dano decorrente da violação de dever informativo e não haja excludente ao dever. / According to Bioethics, informed consent is a dialogic process that, by means of information sharing, accords respect to patients’ self-determination. However, this is often confused with the Informed Consent Form, which is a document signed by patients and family members at the doctor’s or hospital administrator’s request, confirming that they have received information about the treatment and its risks. This thesis is aimed at checking to what extent the use of the “informed consent form” in medical assistance, unaccompanied by the dialogic communicative process called “informed consent”, is per se sufficient to prevent civil liability claims for absence of or deficiency in the duty to inform people about the risks inherent in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. The adopted research method was bibliographical review and documental investigation into appellate decisions containing the expression “informed consent” (or equivalents). The analysis was conducted based on 60 appellate decisions reached by state Appellate Courts in order to examine the profile and result of claims Fisher's Exact Test was also administered to measure the association between the variables “use or non-use of the “consent form” and the “validity or invalidity of claims”. It was found that, although there are no national rules governing the forms of expression about informed consent, there are legal foundations arising from the systematic link among the head provision of Art. 5 of the Federal Constitution; the Civil Code, especially in reference to personality rights, Articles 11-21 of the Civil Code, which protect the Personality Rights; Art. 6, III of the Consumer Protection Code concerning information and transparence duties; and the Code of Medical Ethics, which requires the clarification and prior consent of the patient or his/her legal guardian (Art. 22) and forbids any limitation to the patient’s right to freely decide on his/her person or well-being (Articles 24 and 31). Doctors’ informative duties are an integral part of the informed consent process and violation thereof might result in the professional’s civil liability if harm to the patient, the doctor’s fault, and the causal relation between the fault and the harm resulting from violation of the informative duty are confirmed and if no duty exclusion mechanism exists.

O presente trabalho avaliou através de um questionário e entrevistas pessoais no período de maio a setembro de 2004, cinqüenta participantes voluntários sujeitos de pesquisas envolvendo seres humanos, nas unidades de saúde do âmbito da Secretaria Municipal de Saúde – SMS, espalhadas pelo município de São Paulo e na Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade de São Paulo – FOUSP. Colheu a opinião destes, sobre a experiência da voluntariedade nos experimentos de que participaram nestes locais, abordando questões como: o motivo de terem contribuído, grau de conhecimento do Termo de Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido -TCLE e a importância dispensada a este documento, com que concordaram e autorizaram a participação, de acordo com a determinação da Resolução 196/96, diretriz nacional que regulamenta as pesquisas envolvendo seres humanos. O estudo observou que, passados oito anos da entrada em vigor da Resolução 196/96, o processo de obtenção do consentimento livre e esclarecido ainda carece de cuidados. Participantes efetivamente não são esclarecidos ou não entendem o que lhes foi proposto. Consideramos a necessidade de uma maior difusão, através de ações educativas, do assunto “experimentação com seres humanos”, para um maior entendimento dos voluntários de pesquisas dos seus direitos e deveres, no sentido de manter as pesquisas num elevado padrão ético. O presente estudo pretende contribuir com a hermenêutica desta Resolução e suscitar maiores discussões e reflexões sobre o assunto / The present assignment evaluated through a questionnaire and personal interviews in the period within May and September 2004, fifty volunteered participants subjects of researches involving human beings, in the units of health SMS) in São Paulo city and at Odontology University of São Paulo - FOUSP. It collected the opinion of these volunteers about the experience of voluntariness in the experiments that took part in these locals, tackling matters as: their reason of having contributed, knowledge degree of free consent form – TCLE and the dispensed importance of this document, to which they agreed and authorized the participation, according to the determination of the Resolution 196/96, national guideline that regulates the researches involving human beings. The study observed that eight years after the Resolution 196/96 was put into effect, the obtainment process of the informed consent still lacks of cares. Participants are not clear or do not understand what they were proposed. We consider the need of a larger diffusion through educational actions, of the subject experimentation with human beings, for volunteers larger understanding of their right and duties, in the sense to maintaining the researches in an elevated ethical standard. The present study intends to contribute with the hermeneutics of this Resolution and to raise larger discussions and reflections on the subject

Cette recherche s’intéresse à un sujet d’actualité portant sur la vie privée des mineurs en ligne, plus particulièrement sur la protection des données personnelles. Depuis l’avènement des nouvelles technologies de l’information et des communications (NTIC) et la venue du web 2.0, la protection des données personnelles demeure question d’actualité en plus d’être fort complexe. Cette question demeure encore plus criante lorsqu’il s’agit de mineurs. La présente recherche s’intéresse d’abord à l’utilisation d’Internet par les mineurs, à la notion de vulnérabilité du mineur et de l’insuffisance des règles actuelles. Elle s’intéresse également à la distinction conceptuelle entre « mineur » et « enfant » avant de s’arrêter plus longuement aux principales formes d’infractions qui portent atteinte à la vie privée et à l’intégrité des mineurs. Plus loin dans ce mémoire, on s’intéresse aux dispositions législatives et réglementaires au Canada, aux États-Unis et au sein de l’Union européenne. Dans la dernière partie on montre les différences significatives entre le Canada, les États-Unis et l’Union européenne. Dans la conclusion de ce mémoire, nous revenons sur les faits saillants de cette recherche comparative en insistant sur le fait qu’il est complexe de protéger les données personnelles des mineurs et qu’il existe des différences importantes dans les législations et les règlements en vigueur sur le plan national et international. / This research study addresses a current concern regarding the privacy of minors online, more specifically the protection of personal data. Since the emergence of new information and communication technologies (NICT) and the introduction of Web 2.0, the protection of personal data remains a relevant and very complex issue. This issue is even more critical when it comes to minors. This research study first looks at Internet use by minors, the notion of a minor person’s vulnerability and the limitations of the current rules. It also examines the conceptual distinction between "minor" and "child" before focusing on the main aspect of violation of a minor's privacy and integrity. Later in this master’s thesis, the legislative and regulatory provisions in Canada, the United States and the European Union are examined. The final section highlights the significant differences between Canada, the United States and the European Union. In the conclusion for this dissertation, we will look back at the highlights of this comparative study, emphasizing that the task of protecting the personal data of minors is complex and that there are significant disparities in the laws and regulations in force at the national and international levels.

The purpose and aims of this qualitative descriptive study were to describe how past experiences with research (including communication, information, values and support) may contribute to research fatigue among youth and parents of youth with HIV, CF, and T1D. Eighteen parents and youth were purposively recruited from outpatient subspecialty clinics at a major academic medical center. They took part in qualitative interviews, completed a demographics form, and the Decisional Conflict Scale. Youth participants also completed the Erikson Psychosocial Stage Inventory. Two major themes emerged: blurred lines and hope for the future. Research fatigue was not found in this sample. Results point to challenges with informed consent in settings where research and clinical care are integrated, and suggest that protective factors allow for continued participation without excess burden on youth and parents. Strategies to minimize research fatigue and support engagement in research are offered.

Today, Internet users encounter dark patterns every time they use the Internet, whether it is noticed by the user or goes unnoticed. In this essay, using the quantitative and qualitative methods survey and focus group, it is studied how young adults experience the dark pattern Privacy Zuckering in consent management platforms (CMP) on the Internet. The empirical data collected were analyzed using a thematic analysis and related to different approaches and theories in human-computer interaction (HCI) and interaction design. We have also studied what emotions, thoughts and behaviors consent management platforms, containing Privacy Zuckering, cause in young adults when shown and discussed on different interfaces. Young adults experience uncertainty about the technical aspects of the meaning of GDPR and the design of a CMP, as well as the handling of personal data on the Internet in relation to Privacy Zuckering. / Idag möter internetanvändare dark patterns (mörka mönster) varje gång de använder sig av Internet, vare sig det uppmärksammas av användaren eller går obemärkt förbi. I denna uppsats, med hjälp av de kvantitativa och kvalitativa metoderna enkätundersökning och fokusgrupp, undersöks hur unga vuxna upplever det mörka mönstret Privacy Zuckering (integritets-zuckering) i samtyckeshantering (CMP) på Internet. Den empirin som samlades in, analyserades med hjälp av en tematisk analys och relateras till olika ansatser och teorier inom människa-datorinteraktion (HCI) och interaktionsdesign. Vi har även undersökt vilka känslor, tankar och beteenden samtyckeshantering innehållandes integritets-zuckering framkallar när vi visat och diskuterat olika gränssnitt. Unga vuxna upplever en osäkerhet kring de tekniska aspekterna av GDPR och utformningen av ett CMP, samt hantering av personliga data på Internet i relation till integritets-zuckering.

Behandlingar inom hälso- och sjukvården måste överensstämma med kravet på vetenskap och beprövad erfarenhet (VBE) för att erbjudas patienter enligt svensk rätt. Däremot underställs inte medicinsk forskning som avser människor kravet på VBE eftersom behandlingar som ges till människor inom ramen för forskning inte har beprövats i samma utsträckning som behandlingar inom hälso- och sjukvården och anses såldes inte lika effektiv och säker. Behandlingar inom ramen för forskning får i stället utföras på människor efter ett godkännande av Etikprövningsmyndigheten i enlighet med lag (2003:460) om etikprövning av forskning som avser människor (EPL).  Experimentella behandlingsmetoder har inget uttryckligt lagstöd i svensk rätt men tillämpas i den medicinska praktiken; det handlar om metoder utöver gängse behandlingspraxis som syftar till att ge bot eller lindring till en enskild patient. Sådana behandlingsmetoder uppfyller inte kravet på VBE men anses inte heller omfattas av EPL. Metoderna är således oreglade men motiveras med hjälp av medicinska normer. Att utöva vård inom hälso- och sjukvården som inte lever upp till kravet på VBE är ansvarsgrundande, men enligt nödrätten i 24:4 brottsbalken (BrB) kan utövandet av experimentella behandlingsmetoder innebära ansvarsfrihet vid skuldfrågan. Således finns det utrymme att utföra oreglerade experimentella behandlingar utan att ställas till svars om patienter kommit till skada, eller till och med avlidit.  Det nuvarande rättsliga systemet skiljer med andra ord på människor som utgör patienter och människor som undergår medicinsk forskning och benämns som forskningspersoner. Den kliniska forskningen är däremot inte sällan beroende av vårdens resurser samt strukturer och den grupp som oftast rekryteras till forskningsstudier är just patienter. I praktiken kan alltså en patient också vara en forskningsperson. Hälso- och sjukvårdslagstiftningen skall således vara tillämpbar på en patient som dessutom genomgår forskning och som också enligt EPL utgör en forskningsperson, men varken författningstext eller förarbeten till aktuella regelverk klargör varandras samexistens och således skapas ett juridiskt ingenmansland.  Enligt internationella konventioner om mänskliga rättigheter som Sverige förbundit sig till får ingen utsättas för vetenskapliga och medicinska ingrepp utan ett frivilligt och informerat samtycke. Den svenska rätten är däremot inte förenlig med internationell rätt eftersom det är möjligt att enligt EPL forska på människor utan inhämtandet av ett informerat samtycke.  Patienter och forskningspersoner är en sårbar grupp eftersom sjukdom och nedsatt hälsa inte sällan försvagar oss. Det kan handla om människor som på olika sätt har en nedsatt funktionsförmåga. Patienter och forskningspersoner kan således ha svårt att ta tillvara sina egna intressen och det kan innebära att det kan vara svårt att förstå risker och konsekvenser som är förenade med olika ingrepp. Legala ställföreträdare som kan ta beslut i frågor som rör en annan människas vård och behandling om denne inte själv är kapabel till att ta ett beslut saknas i svensk rätt, vilket också strider mot traktat som Sverige har ingått.  Den svenska hälso- och sjukvårdslagstiftningen är dessutom inte en rättighetsbaserad lagstiftning vilket innebär att enskilda inte kan gå till domstol och få sina rättigheter prövade. Enskildas enda rättsliga möjlighet är i sådana fall att söka anhängiggöra svensk domstol genom åberopandet av Europakonventionen (EKMR) genom 3:4 Skadeståndslagen (SkL), under förutsättningen att rättigheter enligt konventionen har överträtts. Det kan alltså ifrågasättas om människor som genomgår medicinska behandlingar i Sverige innehar adekvata rätts- och skyddsmekanismer och om det rättsliga systemet på ett tillfredsställande sätt skyddar och respekterar människors rätt till ett fritt och informerat samtycke.

Assent, currently defined as “a child’s affirmative agreement”, is a way in which some children are included in the decision-making process regarding their participation in clinical research. Current guidelines for paediatric research do not provide clear directions for how assent should be handled, resulting in confusion among researchers. The goal of this research project was two-fold: to examine the ethical arguments for assent with a view to developing concrete moral justification for its being required, and to develop a framework of significant issues for an investigator to consider when deciding whether to gain assent from an individual child. After an in-depth analysis, it was determined that the ethical justification for assent arises from the researcher’s dual obligations to the child and his parents. A child’s parents are responsible for determining when and how he will develop his decision-making ability. The researcher has an obligation to engage with the child in a manner that complements their pedagogical style, while also treating the child as a being of moral worth. As a child’s family context has an influence on his participation in medical decision-making, further research on children’s daily decision-making within their families is needed. To this end, a three-phase research agenda was designed: a qualitative focus group study, a quantitative questionnaire study, and a discussion panel with paediatric experts. The children in these studies clearly desired to make decisions but did not express an interest in having complete control. They expected their parents to provide them with decision-making guidance in most aspects of their lives. Data collected from parents illustrated that they often tried to involve their children in decisions by providing them with limited options from which to choose and encouraging family discussion. Participants in the discussion panel stated that they did not expect children to make an independent decision regarding medical care, but they might attempt to give children smaller decisions, such as the arm used to provide a blood sample. These results indicate that the definition of assent should be revised, emphasising the child’s involvement in the overall decision making process, without an expectation of an “affirmative agreement”, likely mimicking a familiar decision-making setting from his family context. This could then be documented in the child’s clinical notes through a brief description of all relevant interactions and/or discussions with the child, resulting in an accurate portrayal of the entire assent process.

This thesis is a critique of the prominent strand of contemporary liberal political theory which maintains that liberal political authority must, in some sense, rest on the free consent of those subjected to it, and that such a consensus is achieved if a polity’s basic structure can be publicly justified to its citizenry, or to a relevant subset of it. Call that the liberal legitimacy view. I argue that the liberal legitimacy view cannot provide viable normative foundations for political authority, for the hypothetical consensus it envisages cannot be achieved and sustained without either arbitrarily excluding conspicuous sectors of the citizenry or commanding a consent that is less than free. That is because the liberal legitimacy view’s structure is one that requires a form of consent that carries free-standing normative force (i.e. normative force generated by voluntariness), yet the particular form of hypothetical consent through public justification envisaged by the view does not possess such force, because of its built-in bias in favour of liberalism. I also argue that the liberal legitimacy view is the most recent instantiation of one of two main strands of liberal theory, namely the nowadays dominant contract-based liberalism, which seeks to ground liberal political authority in a hypothetical agreement between the citizens. My case against the liberal legitimacy view, then, contributes to the revitalisation of the other main approach to the normative foundations of liberalism, namely the substantivist one, which legitimates liberal political authority through an appeal to the substantive values and virtues safeguarded and promoted by liberal polities.