Kantian ethics and informed consent are best described as:

• A. Kantian ethics strongly supports informed consent
• B. Kantian ethics generally opposes informed consent in medical practice
• C. Kantian ethics is indifferent toward informed consent
• D. Kantian ethics requires consent only in emergencies

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is that Kantian ethics centers on autonomy and treating people as ends in themselves. Informed consent is the practical expression of that principle. If a physician respects a patient’s autonomous capacity—disclosing relevant information, ensuring understanding, and obtaining voluntary agreement—the patient can make a rational, self-directed choice about their body. This honors the patient as a moral agent and avoids using them merely as a means to achieve the clinician’s goals. Deception, coercion, or withholding information would violate this respect for autonomy, which is why Kantian ethics strongly supports informed consent.

It’s not about opposition, indifference, or limiting consent to emergencies. Kantian ethics views respecting a patient’s autonomy as a standing obligation in medical practice, applicable in ordinary care and, when possible, in emergencies too (with the caveat that capacity and practical constraints can affect how consent is obtained).