This will shows the patient’s right respected and that is a good fundamental part of good practice (McHale, Tingle 2007).A healthcare professional who does not respect this principle may be liable both to legal action by the patients and principle action by their professional body. Their employer also be accountable for action of their staff (DOH, 2001)

Human Right Act in article 3 state ‘prohibition of torture’ it means no one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment Human Rights Act (HRA, 1998). In addition, in common law touching a patient without valid consent may create the civil or criminal offence of battery (common law). Any employee who is not follow the legal principle relating to consent to treatment will face criminal, civil, professional conduct and disciplinary action (Dimond, 2009).

In article 14 Human Rights Act state’ prohibition of discriminations’ health professional should not judge their patients on any ground such as sex ,race colour language religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property ,birth or other status. Compliance with the Human Rights Act is largely reflected in existing good ethical practice, but all health practitioners should be aware of the Human Rights Act and ensure that they act with it (DOH, 2001).

Health professionals should explain the nature of treatment in details as long as it has been explained in aspect the nature of touching will not arise action in trespass (Griffith, Tengnah 2010). For example when a patients believed that she was having a routine post-natal vaccination. In fact she was given the long acting contraceptive Depo-Provera. If health professionals give false and misinformation to the patients consent will be invalid and responsibility in trespass will arise (Griffith, Tengnah 2010).