An argument for the "informed" consent of the governed

If we demand informed consent between healthcare providers and patients, why not between governments and citizens?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

— Declaration of Independence

This Thursday is the 4th of July, a national day of celebration. Before you head out to the beach or a backyard barbecue, we urge you to mark the occasion by having a read of the Declaration of Independence. It’s only four pages long and a re-reading will you remind you of the principles of liberty set forth by the Founding Fathers as well as reset the context for why this day is so special.

One thing worth considering is the notion, embedded in the second paragraph of the Declaration, that governments derive their just powers from “the consent of the governed.” While today we take that somewhat for granted, it was a radical concept in the 1700s for a people who had only ever known rule by a monarch who exercised unlimited, unchecked powers.

As citizens, we give our consent — either tacitly or explicitly — when we use government services, adhere to government rules and laws, pay taxes, and take part in political actions like voting or meeting with elected officials.

Given all the talk these past few years around the notion of informed consent, it’s worth reconsidering the idea of ‘consent of the governed’ from that perspective.

Informed consent came into sharp relief in the COVID era, when people were forced, bribed, and coerced into rolling up their sleeves and taking a needle without being given a full explanation of the risks, benefits, and alternatives to the so-called treatment they were taking.

Informed consent can, in theory, be traced back to ancient times, but a pivotal moment in its formalization occurred after World War II, with the introduction of the Nuremberg Code. Emerging from the Nuremberg Trials, which addressed unethical medical experiments conducted by Nazi doctors, the code established principles such as voluntary consent, absence of coercion, and informed understanding of risks and benefits for participants in medical research.

This code is an important and still-relevant legacy from World War II. One which counters the darkness that easily emerges in the collective heart of humanity when we see the ‘other’ as less than human. It was — and remains — a gift we ignore at our peril. Thanks to this code, many countries now have laws mandating that healthcare providers inform patients about treatment options, risks, benefits, and alternatives before obtaining consent for medical procedures. It’s an integral part of our collective civility — or was, anyway.

The question is: if we demand informed consent between healthcare providers and patients, why not between governments and citizens?

Governments are expected to provide transparent and accurate information so citizens can make informed choices to support or oppose certain government actions. Informed consent also implies that citizens have the freedom to participate in processes voluntarily, without coercion, manipulation, or misinformation. This includes the right to disagree with our government, freely express our opinions, and engage in civic activities without the risk of harm, arrest, censorship, or intimidation.

The founding fathers intended for our congressional representatives to be the link between us and the federal government. It’s their job to represent our interests in Washington, but it’s our job to tell them what we want and need.

Pop quiz: without looking it up, can you name the person who represents your congressional district? If you said yes, you’re in the minority. A 2017 poll found that only about one in three citizens (37%) knows their representative’s name.

Without our active participation, political parties, electioneers, interest groups, and the media — none of which have our interests as their main goal — fill the role of “informing” us.

Citizens have the duty to understand the process by which laws are made and take part in the process when public participation is warranted. That is what citizenship means. If we abdicate this duty, by staying silent and uninformed or distracted and nonchalant, we essentially give the government our unvoiced consent. We become part of the “silent majority.”

Qui tacet consentire videtur, ubi loqui debuit ac potuit

(Latin proverb roughly translated as: “He who is silent, when he ought to have spoken and was able to, is taken to agree.”)

From the perspective of informed consent, it would appear we are not living up to our end of the bargain, as laid out in the Declaration of Independence. Sure, much blame can be laid at the feet of corrupt government leaders and a gutted public education system — one that promotes a warped collective ideology over civics and individual responsibility — but we citizens must also shine a light upon, and acknowledge our failed duty for, not making informed consent a top priority.

As the authors of the Declaration of Independence wrote:

…all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Got it?

So ask yourself, is now the time to do some throwing off?

---