What did the court say about Moore’s right to an informed consent

Please respond to this with intext citations 

What did the court say about Moore’s right to an informed consent? Do you agree, or do you feel that Moore needed to be given more or less information than the court required?

Did the court indicate that Moore had a right to the bodily fluids and tissues that had been removed from his body? Why or why not? Do you agree with this conclusion?

The courts ruled that Moore does not have rights of any profits that may be earned when it comes to any of the body parts or fluid used for any research. They only thing that Moore and any patient will receive is informed consent.

Do I agree? I don’t believe that I do. I believe that because our bodies are fascinating and develop rare and possibly strange things that, permission should be given to any Doctor or researcher to have any patents. If any money it profited from the research, then I think at least half should be given to the patient because medical issues are expensive.

I think that any information that is obtained about any research or should be given to the patient, because the way I see it is a learning experience for them too.