Frank, I was thinking over what you wrote a few weeks ago regarding the ethics of prescribing without consent. Your example of the Aurum situation was illuminating.
The aspect that makes me most uneasy can also be illustrated by that example; what if Aurum were given and, although it was the correct remedy, it gave a momentary aggravation, and the patient jumped!?
Aggravations are a major reason not to prescribe without consent.
It is too much to take upon ourselves the responsibility for the outcome of a prescription - that must remain with the patient for our sake as well as theirs. And for that reason the choice of whether to administer the remedy should not rest with the homoeopath.