“Action X is an informed consent of person P to intervention I if and only if:1. P receives in-depth information about I2. P includes the information3. P acts voluntarily in the execution of X4. P is competent to perform X, e5. P consents to I” (Faden 274). The use of informed consent is considered an essential component of providing healthcare and creating a good patient-doctor relationship. The most standard model of informed consent states that to be considered authentic informed consent you must possess the following essential elements: disclosure, understanding (true understanding), voluntariness, competence and, above all, actual consent. The interesting fact about informed consent is that most people are enthusiastic about including it in patient-doctor decision-making dynamics; it does not guarantee or add further certainty that decisions will be autonomous. There are two types of informed consent: one from a practical and logical position (Sense 1) and the other from the legal or institutionalized component (Sense 2). Competence is void in the use of Sense 2 informed consent; there is no push for explicit understanding of information as long as protocol is followed correctly. Sense 2 informed consent increases the likelihood of loss of autonomy and higher rates of ill-conceived incompetence due to misunderstanding. I will discuss Sense 2 informed consent and how it specifically relates to competency; as well as why the elements of competence are considered normative. “Sense 2 or effective consent as many called it, is politically oriented with conditions that are not derivable from the analysis of the authorization of autonomy or the respect of autonomy. . . refers to legal or institutional issues... halfway through the document... the event occurs and is due to the lack of evaluation of real understanding. I think the best system for obtaining consent would incorporate a regulated system that takes into account each institution and its needs, but that also equally weighs the importance of truly understanding the facts and realizing the patient's ability to make decisions. But even if this were established as standard practice, there would still be the issue of how the assessment is carried out and how accurate it is due to other factors, for example the current state of the injuries or the medications needed for full psychological and/or psychological functioning. conceptual. There may also be the problem of how to regulate such a subjective issue; Every doctor will have different ethical opinions and this will inevitably influence how they evaluate the patient and their ability to make the best decisions regarding their health..