In the case of someone prescribed opioids with insufficient information, no, clearly that isn't informed consent (unless the recipient is sufficiently well educ

In the case of someone prescribed opioids with insufficient information, no, clearly that isn't informed consent (unless the recipient is sufficiently well educated to know better). They were essentially misled. How do you think the other cases should be judged, though? Say the case of someone who starts using heroin as an adult, without first being prescribed opioids. Would you not treat that as a moral failure on his or her part?