Medicines and medical devices containing animal-derived ingredients are frequently used on patients without their informed consent, despite a significant proportion of patients wanting to know if an animal-derived product is going to be used in their care. Here, I outline three arguments for why this practice is wrong. First, I argue that using animal-derived medical products on patients without their informed consent undermines respect for their autonomy. Second, it risks causing nontrivial psychological harm. Third, it is morally inconsistent to respect patients’ dietary preferences and then use animal-derived medicines or medical devices on them without their informed consent. I then address several anticipated objections and conclude that the continued failure to address this issue is an ethical blind spot that warrants applying the principles of respect for autonomy and informed consent consistently.
- applied and professional ethics
- clinical ethics
- education for health care professionals
Data availability statement
There are no data in this work.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Implications of religious and cultural beliefs on selection of medicines
- Medical ethics for children: applying the four principles to paediatrics
- Consent for anaesthesia
- In defence of personal autonomy
- Ethics of care challenge to advance directives for dementia patients
- Informed consent should be obtained from patients to use products (skin substitutes) and dressings containing biological material
- Respect for autonomy: deciding what is good for oneself
- Ethical and practical considerations in prescribing animal-derived medication
- Ethics needs principles—four can encompass the rest—and respect for autonomy should be “first among equals”
- Does the General Medical Council’s 2020 guidance on consent advance on its 2008 guidance?