Essays - Consent

Question 1

What are the key points in a consent essay?

Answer 1

The general principle
Reasoning
Intereference Justified?
Conclusion

Question 2

What is meant by general principle?

Answer 2

If the harm is foreseeable then you can’t consent to it.

Question 3

Can you consent to assault and battery?

Answer 3

Yes you can, as harm isn’t the intended outcome.

Question 4

What does Slingsby rule?

Answer 4

That you can consent to assault and battery. He killed his wife accidentally, as whilst having rough sex he accidentally cut her with his ring and she died of blood poisoning. It wasn’t foreseeable, so you can consent to it.

Question 5

Can you consent ABH and GBH?

Answer 5

No you can’t, as harm is foreseeable

Question 6

What does Donovan rule?

Answer 6

That there was some harm so you can’t consent to ABH, he whipped his wife? Well a women he took to his garage.

Question 7

What did Brown rule?

Answer 7

That you can’t consent to s.20 GBH, it is the group of 18th-century kinky lads.

Question 8

What did Dica rule?

Answer 8

Can’t consent to s.18 GBH also to consent you need to know the full details. Like his partner had consensual sex with him, but didn’t consent to being given STDs.

Question 9

What does it mean by reasoning?

Answer 9

The law can’t condone the infliction of harm

Question 10

Why can’t the law condone the infliction of harm?

Answer 10

As the law is all about protecting the vulnerable who may be coerced to consent either out of fear or aren’t mentally capable of consenting.

Question 11

Who does the law prioritise by making the rule of can’t consent to harm?

Answer 11

The vunrable people who cannot consent take priority over kinky couples in their bedroom.

Question 12

Why do vulnerable people take priority over individual rights (kinky people)?

Answer 12

As it is better to make it all illegal and catch those who force harm on others without consent. Also kinky people can be kinky just don’t do publicly.

Question 13

What would happen if the law didn’t protect the vulnerable?

Answer 13

Then society would break, as there is no rules on what you can consent to, making forced consent a lot more common and stopping the law from protecting those who are vulnerable.

Question 14

What is legal liability in the UK based on?

Answer 14

Causing harm. So causing harm is the beginning of any crime regardless of consent.

Question 15

What does it mean by is interference justified?

Answer 15

Should the law interfere with people’s individual choices?

Question 16

How is Wilson relevant to this point?

Answer 16

That the court only interferes when it is necessary to. For instance they acquitted wilson, probably because they were a married couple with neither one being vulnerable. So the court didn’t deem it relevant to enforce punishment on these 2 consenting adults.

Question 17

What would happen if we were to legalise consent to harm?

Answer 17

The courts wouldn’t be able to tell who had be coerced and who genuinely consented, so it stops the law from serving justice. Therefore it is safer to simply outlaw consent to harm for everyone.

Question 18

What does the Government realise?

Answer 18

That exceptions are needed, so you can consent to foreseeable harm if it is for the jostling of everyday life, or it’s: sports, surgery and cosmetics/body modifications.

Question 19

Is it in the public interest a valid reason to interfere with the individual rights of people?

Answer 19

Yes, they need to protect the vulnerable.

Question 20

What is the conclusion?

Answer 20

That the law will always be a balancing different interests in society. However, protection of the vulnerable and standard setting still prevails.

Question 21

What is one of the interests in society?

Answer 21

That we are in an era of increasing awareness and want to exercise personal freedoms. However, protecting the vulnerable in society will always be placed higher than our personal freedoms.