rotection of the law against violations.
             In the case of children, the Council also recommends that the capacity to consent should be assessed before proceeding. The child should be able to understand all the components and possible consequences of the treatment or procedure. If the child is too young to be judged competent to provide informed consent, the parent should take responsibility for this. If refused, the physical is allowed to seek the approval of a court.
             It is important to note that full disclosure is to be provided in a clear and understandable manner. In cases where non-therapeutic, experimental procedures are involved, the physician is to ensure that the participant fully understands all the implications of these. Not disclosing the potential dangers of a study is a violation of medical research ethics.
             According to the BBC News (2008), Dr. Andrew Wakefield was found to violate the General Medical Council's requirements for research ethics by taking blood from children at a birthday party for money. According to the report, the doctor did not provide full disclosure regarding the potential dangers of his study to the parents of the children involved before obtaining their consent. Furthermore, he should also have obtained the approval of an ethics committee. From the report, it appears that the benefits of the study for the children involved did not justify the doctor's lack of disclosure.
             According to the doctor, he was not "aware" that he was violating any Council requirements, but nonetheless declared himself willing to admit his error. This case proves that, before conducting experimental studies of any kind, a physician should ensure that all ethical requirements are met, and that full disclosure is provided prior to obtaining consent.
             One of the worst cases of nondisclosure is probably the well-known Tuskegee Syphilis Study. The study was begun in 1932 by the U.S. Public Health service and t...