The issue of Consent is an old and controversial question in the field of medical ethics. Nowadays, informed Consent is widely considered as a fundamental element in carrying out any medical treatments on a person. Yet some aspects of the issue are blurred and need to be studied more carefully. In the present, article after dealing with three concepts of Expressed Consent, Implied Consent and Concealed Consent, it will be concluded that expressed Consent is the sole way to reveal and determine the Consent of the person in the field of ART. The main contribution of this article is to discuss the concept of the concealed Consent. It is discussed that concealed Consent is a fiction and thus may not be considered in medical treatments on a person.

Introduction: Use of informed medical Consent prior to therapy is not a new concept and has been performed for a long time. Yet in recent years it has acquired a critical importance due to the widely increased complexity of medical procedures. Informing the patient about his chances of benefiting from a given therapeutic procedure and the likelihood of its antecedent risks and side effects is an inseparable and essential component of standard patient management. An informed Consent will be meaningless without such data. Informed Consent plays key roles in both medical ethics and patient rights, and its proper application prior to diagnostic or therapeutic procedures typically will yield better results. It is therefore imperative that the patient or his legal guardian or surrogate fully understand and approve the therapy under consideration. Understanding and approving are equally important in this process and when properly applied in an ethical manner, can hasten the process of patient recovery. Medical personnel are thus obliged to fully reveal the patients all information about their illness as well as the therapeutic options available to them. Failure to do so will encumber legal ramifications.

The interpretation of "private plaintiff's Consent" and "ways to obtain it" suffers from a kind of challenging ambiguity and conciseness. Therefore, research is needed in it. One possibility is its "subjectivity. " This means that acquittal of the offender is possible only with the Consent of the victim. Another idea and possibility is its "method",That is, the output of satisfaction is not necessary, which is obtained in the form of words, but if the compensation is realized, satisfaction is achieved. The result of the approach of dividing the Consent into real and legal is that in the title of private plaintiff, the aspect of privacy is superior to the complaint and, consequently, it is concluded that in addition to the direct method of satisfying the private plaintiff with apparent Consent or expression, In case of resignation or compensation of damages to the private plaintiff by any person, whether the offender or a third party, the Consent of the private plaintiff is obtained in a "judicial" manner. That is, obtaining the Consent of the private plaintiff in a real and logical manner is not the exclusive way to obtain the Consent of the private plaintiff.

This article discussed mutual-Consent divorce in the context of thoughts and attitude of female applicants of this type of divorce with an inductive qualitative and ethnographic method. Based on the qualitative purposive sampling, 30 women of those who had referred for divorce to family court of Karaj, were selected and deeply interviewed. The results obtained in six major categories as follows: Rethinking the role of men as families’ breadwinners, inappropriate sexual relationships, emotional conflicts, cultural-social dissensions, normative pressures of family and relatives, and personality and behavioral disorders. The core-oriented category of this study is "Women's attitude towards mutual-Consent divorce" that includes other major categories and can semantically alter and redirect women’s opinion about mutual-Consent divorce. According to the results, the term of mutual-Consent is thought-provoking in this type of divorce; because considering the situations which were leaded to mutual-Consent divorce and quantifying them revealed that nearly 32% of mutual-Consent divorces were not mutual in fact; since, these women accepted divorce with desperation, coercion and threat.