My aims in writing this book were to expose the flaws of the current legal regulation of consent and to suggest how the deficiencies might be addressed. In achieving these aims I have not attempted to provide a complete or final solution, if such a thing is possible. Indeed, my position is that consent is inherently political, which means that the current approach will always be open to criticism. However, I do not see this as a weakness but as the strength of a democratic polity. Such criticism does not necessarily require change but it does prevent the arrogance of complacency and it means that our beliefs and assumptions are constantly being challenged. My arguments fit into this cycle of criticism as a challenge to the way consent has developed since bioethics emerged in the 1960s.

The growth of bioethics, along with the developments of groups such as the Patients Association, growing media scrutiny and the rise of a consumerist society have all contributed to an increasingly liberal approach to autonomy and consent. This has resulted in an approach to autonomy that risks abandoning patients and emphasises a respect for individual boundaries at the expense of a care for the person's welfare. However, the problems with consent do not end there. Apart from critiquing current ethical approaches to consent, a main objective has been to examine how the legal regulation has developed against the backdrop of this concern for individual autonomy.