Freedom of Health Choices vs Coercion in Medicine
Freedom of Health Choices vs Coercion in Medicine
The health crisis of 2020-2022 explicitly highlighted the freedom of health choices as never before in our times had the world seen such a breach of that freedom and neglect of informed consent
Freedom of choice and informed consent are fundamental values that should determine any action carried out in the fields of healthcare and medical procedures. Such principles are mirrored in several international decisions and agreements agreed upon after the World War II. The Nuremberg Code (1947) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that was adopted by the UN in 1966 and brought to force in 1976, have outlined the key principles of scientific and medical procedures and the individual rights of their subjects. They prohibit any interventions conducted in the cause of medical or scientific experimentation without prior free and informed consent of the subjects.
In Europe, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and the European Charter of Patients Rights (fourteen patients rights) that are based on the aforementioned charter, outline individual rights and freedoms in healthcare, which aim at guaranteeing "a high level of human health protection".
Informed consent is a particularly important principle that stresses the need for a patient to be sufficiently informed about the risks, benefits and alternatives of a given medical procedure or intervention so that he can make well-considered and voluntary decisions about his health and well-being. It originates from the patient's right to direct what happens to his body. Likewise, the first principle of the Nuremburg Code highlights:
"The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision."
Informed consent, has rightly been viewed as the protection of patients' human rights. The key contribution of Nuremberg Code was to merge Hippocratic ethics and the protection of human rights into a single code. Informed consent is also the basis of the International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects, the most recent guidelines promulgated by the World Health Organization and the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (1993).
Freedom of choice in medicine also includes the right to freely choose among the different treatment procedures and their providers on the basis of adequate information. This presumes the existence of a real choice between different effective treatments which are aimed at restoring one's health. It means that treatments should be designed to prevent health problems and treat the causes of a disease, while minimizing the possibility of additional harm and side-effects.
Moreover, such choice should comprise of diagnostic or therapeutic programmes tailored specifically for person's needs, since healthcare's effectiveness is dependent on its being made as personalized as possible. Standardization and one-fits-all treatments in healthcare should be avoided as counterproductive and regarded as possible breaches of individual freedom, especially when the presumption of informed consent is not fully complied with.
The health crisis of 2020-2022 explicitly highlighted the need for a practical protection of our freedom of choice in personal medical decisions. Never before in the modern age had the world seen such a breach of that freedom and such neglect of informed consent. Authorities and sections of the medical profession supported unethical, coercive and misinformed policies such as vaccine mandates and vaccine passports, undermining the principles of informed consent. People in many countries were submitted to coercion to undergo medical experimental interventions (inoculations) under the threat of losing their careers, their income, freedom of movement etc.
Many made a conscious decision not to comply with these demands and valued their right to choose differently, in regards to their bodily health and well-being. As a result, they did lose their jobs, careers, accesses to public services, freedom of movement etc. Such totalitarian actions, which were conducted and supported by an ensemble of players (pharmaceutical, medical and political establishments) is something to push back against.