document_title: Informed consent

question_text: what year did informed consent achieve formal legal definition

text: Informed consent

text: Assessment[edit]

text: Informed consent can be complex to evaluate, because neither expressions of consent, nor expressions of understanding of implications, necessarily mean that full adult consent was in fact given, nor that full comprehension of relevant issues is internally digested. Consent may be implied within the usual subtleties of human communication, rather than explicitly negotiated verbally or in writing. In some cases consent cannot legally be possible, even if the person protests he does indeed understand and wish. There are also structured instruments for evaluating capacity to give informed consent, although no ideal instrument presently exists.[citation needed]

text: Thus, there is always a degree to which informed consent must be assumed or inferred based upon observation, or knowledge, or legal reliance. This especially is the case in sexual or relational issues. In medical or formal circumstances, explicit agreement by means of signature—normally relied on legally—regardless of actual consent, is the norm. This is the case with certain procedures, such as a "do not resuscitate" directive that a patient signed prior to their illness.[citation needed]

text: Brief examples of each of the above:

text:
A person may verbally agree to something from fear, perceived social pressure, or psychological difficulty in asserting true feelings. The person requesting the action may honestly be unaware of this and believe the consent is genuine, and rely on it. Consent is expressed, but not internally given.
A person may claim to understand the implications of some action, as part of consent, but in fact has failed to appreciate the possible consequences fully and may later deny the validity of the consent for this reason. Understanding needed for informed consent is present but is, in fact (through ignorance), not present.
A person signs a legal release form for a medical procedure, and later feels he did not really consent. Unless he can show actual misinformation, the release is usually persuasive or conclusive in law, in that the clinician may rely legally upon it for consent. In formal circumstances, a written consent usually legally overrides later denial of informed consent (unless obtained by misrepresentation).
Informed consent in the U.S. can be overridden in emergency medical situations pursuant to 21CFR50.24, which was first brought to the general public's attention via the controversy surrounding the study of Polyheme.

tag: ol

text: Valid elements[edit]

text: For an individual to give valid informed consent, three components must be present: disclosure, capacity and voluntariness.[3][4]

text:
Disclosure requires the researcher to supply each prospective subject with the information necessary to make an autonomous decision and also to ensure that the subject adequate understands the information provided. This latter requirement implies that a written consent form be written in lay language suited for the comprehension skills of subject population, as well as assessing the level of understanding through conversation.
Capacity pertains to the ability of the subject to both understand the information provided and form a reasonable judgment based on the potential consequences of his/her decision.
Voluntariness refers to the subject’s right to freely exercise his/her decision making without being subjected to external pressure such as coercion, manipulation, or undue influence.

text: Waiver of requirement[edit]

text: Waiver of the consent requirement may be applied in certain circumstances where no foreseeable harm is expected to result from the study or when permitted by law, federal regulations, or if an ethical review committee has approved the non-disclosure of certain information.[5]

text: Besides studies with minimal risk, waivers of consent may be obtained in a military setting. According to 10 USC 980, the United States Code for the Armed Forces, Limitations on the Use of Humans as Experimental Subjects, a waiver of advanced informed consent may be granted by the Secretary of Defense if a research project would:[6]

text:
Directly benefit subjects.
Advance the development of a medical product necessary to the military.
Be carried out under all laws and regulations (i.e., Emergency Research Consent Waiver) including those pertinent to the FDA.

text: While informed consent is a basic right and should be carried out effectively, if a patient is incapacitated due to injury or illness, it is still important that patients benefit from emergency experimentation.[7] The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) joined together to create federal guidelines to permit emergency research, without informed consent.[7] However, they can only proceed with the research if they obtain a waiver of informed consent (WIC) or an emergency exception from informed consent (EFIC).[7]

text: History[edit]

text: Informed consent is a technical term first used by attorney, Paul G. Gebhard, in a medical malpractice United States court case in 1957.[8] In tracing its history, some scholars have suggested tracing the history of checking for any of these practices:[9]:54

text:
A patient agrees to a health intervention based on an understanding of it.
The patient has multiple choices and is not compelled to choose a particular one.
The consent includes giving permission.

text: These practices are part of what constitutes informed consent, and their history is the history of informed consent.[9]:60 They combine to form the modern concept of informed consent—which rose in response to particular incidents in modern research.[9]:60 Whereas various cultures in various places practiced informed consent, the modern concept of informed consent was developed by people who drew influence from Western tradition.[9]:60

text: Medical history[edit]

text: Historians cite a series of medical guidelines to trace the history of informed consent in medical practice.

text: The Hippocratic Oath, a 500 BC Greek text, was the first set of Western writings giving guidelines for the conduct of medical professionals. It advises that physicians conceal most information from patients to give the patients the best care.[9]:61 The rationale is a beneficence model for care—the doctor knows better than the patient, and therefore should direct the patient's care, because the patient is not likely to have better ideas than the doctor.[9]:61

text: Henri de Mondeville, a French surgeon who in the 14th century, wrote about medical practice. He traced his ideas to the Hippocratic Oath.[9]:63[10][11] Among his recommendations were that doctors "promise a cure to every patient" in hopes that the good prognosis would inspire a good outcome to treatment.[9]:63 Mondeville never mentioned getting consent, but did emphasize the need for the patient to have confidence in the doctor.[9]:63 He also advised that when deciding therapeutically unimportant details the doctor should meet the patients' requests "so far as they do not interfere with treatment".[12]

text: Benjamin Rush was an 18th-century United States physician who was influenced by the Age of Enlightenment cultural movement.[9]:65 Because of this, he advised that doctors ought to share as much information as possible with patients. He recommended that doctors educate the public and respect a patient's informed decision to accept therapy.[9]:65 There is no evidence that he supported seeking a consent from patients.[9]:65 In a lecture titled "On the duties of patients to their physicians", he stated that patients should be strictly obedient to the physician's orders; this was representative of much of his writings.[9]:65 John Gregory, Rush's teacher, wrote similar views that a doctor could best practice beneficence by making decisions for the patients without their consent.[9]:66[13]

text: Thomas Percival was a British physician who published a book called Medical Ethics in 1803.[9]:68 Percival was a student of the works of Gregory and various earlier Hippocratic physicians.[9]:68 Like all previous works, Percival's Medical Ethics makes no mention of soliciting for the consent of patients or respecting their decisions.[9]:68 Percival said that patients have a right to truth, but when the physician could provide better treatment by lying or withholding information, he advised that the physician do as he thought best.[9]:68

text: When the American Medical Association was founded they in 1847 produced a work called the first edition of the American Medical Association Code of Medical Ethics.[9]:69 Many sections of this book are verbatim copies of passages from Percival's Medical Ethics.[9]:69 A new concept in this book was the idea that physicians should fully disclose all patient details truthfully when talking to other physicians, but the text does not also apply this idea to disclosing information to patients.[9]:70 Through this text, Percival's ideas became pervasive guidelines throughout the United States as other texts were derived from them.[9]:70

text: Worthington Hooker was an American physician who in 1849 published Physician and Patient.[9]:70 This medical ethics book was radical demonstrating understanding of the AMA's guidelines and Percival's philosophy and soundly rejecting all directives that a doctor should lie to patients.[9]:70 In Hooker's view, benevolent deception is not fair to the patient, and he lectured widely on this topic.[9]:70 Hooker's ideas were not broadly influential.[9]:70

text: Research history[edit]

text: Historians cite a series of human subject research experiments to trace the history of informed consent in research.

text: The U.S. Army Yellow Fever Commission “is considered the first research group in history to use consent forms.”[14] In 1900, Major Walter Reed was appointed head of the four man U.S. Army Yellow Fever Commission in Cuba that determined mosquitoes were the vector for yellow fever transmission. His earliest experiments were probably done without formal documentation of informed consent. In later experiments he obtained support from appropriate military and administrative authorities. He then drafted what is now “one of the oldest series of extant informed consent documents.”[15] The three surviving examples are in Spanish with English translations; two have an individual’s signature and one is marked with an X.[16]

text: Tearoom Trade is the name of a book by American psychologist Laud Humphreys. In it he describes his research into male homosexual acts.[17] In conducting this research he never sought consent from his research subjects and other researchers raised concerns that he violated the right to privacy for research participants.[17]

text: The Milgram experiment is the name of a 1961 experiment conducted by American psychologist Stanley Milgram. In the experiment Milgram had an authority figure order research participants to commit a disturbing act of harming another person.[18] After the experiment he would reveal that he had deceived the participants and that they had not hurt anyone, but the research participants were upset at the experience of having participated in the research.[18] The experiment raised broad discussion on the ethics of recruiting participants for research without giving them full information about the nature of the research.[18]

text: Chester M. Southam used HeLa cells to inject into cancer patients and Ohio State Penitentiary inmates without informed consent to determine if people could become immune to cancer and if cancer could be transmitted.[19]

text: Medical procedures[edit]

text: The doctrine of informed consent relates to professional negligence and establishes a breach of the duty of care owed to the patient (see duty of care, breach of the duty, and respect for persons). The doctrine of informed consent also has significant implications for medical trials of medications, devices, or procedures.

text: Requirements of the professional[edit]

text: Until 2015 in the United Kingdom and in countries such as Malaysia and Singapore, informed consent in medical procedures requires proof as to the standard of care to expect as a recognised standard of acceptable professional practice (the Bolam Test), that is, what risks would a medical professional usually disclose in the circumstances (see Loss of right in English law). Arguably, this is "sufficient consent" rather than "informed consent." The UK has since departed from the Bolam test for judging standards of informed consent, due to the landmark ruling in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board. This moves away from the concept of a reasonable physician and instead uses the standard of a reasonable patient, and what risks an individual would attach significance to.

text: Medicine in the United States, Australia, and Canada also takes this patient-centric approach to "informed consent." Informed consent in these jurisdictions requires healthcare providers to disclose significant risks, as well as risks of particular importance to that patient. This approach combines an objective (a hypothetical reasonable patient) and subjective (this particular patient) approach.

text: The doctrine of informed consent should be contrasted with the general doctrine of medical consent, which applies to assault or battery. The consent standard here is only that the person understands, in general terms, the nature of and purpose of the intended intervention. As the higher standard of informed consent applies to negligence, not battery, the other elements of negligence must be made out. Significantly, causation must be shown: That had the individual been made aware of the risk he would not have proceeded with the operation (or perhaps with that surgeon).

text: Optimal establishment of an informed consent requires adaptation to cultural or other individual factors of the patient. For example, people from Mediterranean and Arab appear to rely more on the context of the delivery of the information, with the information being carried more by who is saying it and where, when, and how it's being said, rather than what is said, which is of relatively more importance in typical "Western" countries.[20]

text: The informed consent doctrine is generally implemented through good healthcare practice: pre-operation discussions with patients and the use of medical consent forms in hospitals. However, reliance on a signed form should not undermine the basis of the doctrine in giving the patient an opportunity to weigh and respond to the risk. In one British case, a doctor performing routine surgery on a woman noticed that she had cancerous tissue in her womb. He took the initiative to remove the woman's womb; however, as she had not given informed consent for this operation, the doctor was judged by the General Medical Council to have acted negligently. The council stated that the woman should have been informed of her condition, and allowed to make her own decision.

text: Obtaining informed consents[edit]

text: To capture and manage informed consents, hospital management systems typically use paper-based consent forms which are scanned and stored in a document handling system after obtaining the necessary signatures. Hospital systems and research organizations are adopting an electronic way of capturing informed consents to enable indexing, to improve comprehension, search and retrieval of consent data, thus enhancing the ability to honor to patient intent and identify willing research participants.[21][22][23][24] More recently, Health Sciences South Carolina, a statewide research collaborative focused on transforming healthcare quality, health information systems and patient outcomes, developed an open-source system called Research Permissions Management System (RPMS).[25][26]

text: Competency of the patient[edit]

text: The ability to give informed consent is governed by a general requirement of competency. In common law jurisdictions, adults are presumed competent to consent. This presumption can be rebutted, for instance, in circumstances of mental illness or other incompetence. This may be prescribed in legislation or based on a common-law standard of inability to understand the nature of the procedure. In cases of incompetent adults, a health care proxy makes medical decisions. In the absence of a proxy, the medical practitioner is expected to act in the patient's best interests until a proxy can be found.

text: By contrast, 'minors' (which may be defined differently in different jurisdictions) are generally presumed incompetent to consent, but depending on their age and other factors may be required to provide Informed assent. In some jurisdictions (e.g. much of the U.S.), this is a strict standard. In other jurisdictions (e.g. England, Australia, Canada), this presumption may be rebutted through proof that the minor is ‘mature’ (the ‘Gillick standard’). In cases of incompetent minors, informed consent is usually required from the parent (rather than the 'best interests standard') although a parens patriae order may apply, allowing the court to dispense with parental consent in cases of refusal.

text: Deception[edit]

text: Research involving deception is controversial given the requirement for informed consent. Deception typically arises in social psychology, when researching a particular psychological process requires that investigators deceive subjects. For example, in the Milgram experiment, researchers wanted to determine the willingness of participants to obey authority figures despite their personal conscientious objections. They had authority figures demand that participants deliver what they thought was an electric shock to another research participant. For the study to succeed, it was necessary to deceive the participants so they believed that the subject was a peer and that their electric shocks caused the peer actual pain.

text: Nonetheless, research involving deception prevents the subject/patient from exercising his/her basic right of autonomous informed decision-making and conflicts with the ethical principle of respect for persons.

text: The Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct set by the American Psychological Association says that psychologists may not conduct research that includes a deceptive compartment unless they can justify the act by the value and importance of the study's results, and show they couldn't obtain the results by some other way. Moreover, the research should bear no potential harm to the subject as an outcome of deception, be it physical pain or emotional distress. Finally, the code requires a debriefing session, in which the experimenter tells the subject about the deception, and gives subjects the option of withdrawing their data.[27]

text: Abortion[edit]

text: In some U.S. states, informed consent laws (sometimes called "right to know" laws) require that a woman seeking an elective abortion receive information from the abortion provider about her legal rights, alternatives to abortion (such as adoption), available public and private assistance, and other information specified in the law, before the abortion is performed. Other countries with such laws (e.g. Germany) require that the information giver be properly certified to make sure that no abortion is carried out for the financial gain of the abortion provider and to ensure that the decision to have an abortion is not swayed by any form of incentive.[28][29]

text: Some informed consent laws have been criticized for allegedly using "loaded language in an apparently deliberate attempt to 'personify' the fetus,"[30] but those critics acknowledge that "most of the information in the [legally mandated] materials about abortion comports with recent scientific findings and the principles of informed consent", although "some content is either misleading or altogether incorrect."[31]

text: Children[edit]

text: As children often lack the decision making ability or legal power (competence) to provide true informed consent for medical decisions, it often falls on parents or legal guardians to provide informed permission for medical decisions. This "consent by proxy" usually works reasonably well, but can lead to ethical dilemmas when the judgment of the parents or guardians and the medical professional differ with regard to what constitutes appropriate decisions "in the best interest of the child". Children who are legally emancipated, and certain situations such as decisions regarding sexually transmitted diseases or pregnancy, or for unemancipated minors who are deemed to have medical decision making capacity, may be able to provide consent without the need for parental permission depending on the laws of the jurisdiction the child lives in. The American Academy of Pediatrics encourages medical professionals also to seek the assent of older children and adolescents by providing age appropriate information to these children to help empower them in the decision making process.[32]

text: Research on children has benefited society in many ways. The only effective way to establish normal patterns of growth and metabolism is to do research on infants and young children. When addressing the issue of informed consent with children, the primary response is parental consent. This is valid, although only legal guardians are able to consent for a child, not adult siblings.[33] Additionally, parents may not order the termination of a treatment that is required to keep a child alive, even if they feel it is in the best interest.[33] Guardians are typically involved in the consent of children, however a number of doctrines have developed that allow children to receive health treatments without parental consent. For example, emancipated minors may consent to medical treatment, and minors can also consent in an emergency.[33]

text: Research[edit]

text: Informed consent is part of the ethical clinical research as well, in which a human subject voluntarily confirms his or her willingness to participate in a particular clinical trial, after having been informed of all aspects of the trial that are relevant to the subject's decision to participate. Informed consent is documented by means of a written, signed, and dated informed consent form.[34] In medical research, the Nuremberg Code set a base international standard in 1947, which continued to develop, for example in response to the ethical violation in the Holocaust. Nowadays, medical research is overseen by an ethics committee that also oversees the informed consent process.

text: As the medical guidelines established in the Nuremberg Code were imported into the ethical guidelines for the social sciences, informed consent became a common part of the research procedure.[35] However, while informed consent is the default in medical settings, it is not always required in the social science. Here, research often involves low or no risk for participants, unlike in many medical experiments. Second, the mere knowledge that they participate in a study can cause people to alter their behavior, as in the Hawthorne Effect: "In the typical lab experiment, subjects enter an environment in which they are keenly aware that their behavior is being monitored, recorded, and subsequently scrutinized."[36]:168 In such cases, seeking informed consent directly interferes with the ability to conduct the research, because the very act of revealing that a study is being conducted is likely to alter the behavior studied. List exemplifies the potential dilemma that can result: "if one were interested in exploring whether, and to what extent, race or gender influences the prices that buyers pay for used cars, it would be difficult to measure accurately the degree of discrimination among used car dealers who know that they are taking part in an experiment."[37] In cases where such interference is likely, and after careful consideration, a researcher may forgo the informed consent process. This is commonly done after weighting the risk to study participants versus the benefit to society and whether participants are present in the study out of their own wish and treated fairly.[38] Researchers often consult with an ethics committee or institutional review board to render a decision.

text: The birth of new online media, such as social media, has complicated the idea of informed consent. In an online environment people pay little attention to Terms of Use agreements and can subject themselves to research without thorough knowledge. This issue came to the public light following a study conducted by Facebook Inc. in 2014, and published by that company and Cornell University.[39] Facebook conducted a study where they altered the Facebook News Feeds of roughly 700,000 users to reduce either the amount of positive or negative posts they saw for a week. The study then analyzed if the users status updates changed during the different conditions. The study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

text: The lack of informed consent led to outrage among many researchers and users.[40] Many believed that by potentially altering the mood of users by altering what posts they see, Facebook put at-risk individuals at higher dangers for depression and suicide. However, supports of Facebook claim that Facebook details that they have the right to use information for research in their terms of use.[41] Others say the experiment is just a part of Facebook’s current work, which alters News Feeds algorithms continually to keep people interested and coming back to the site. Others pointed out that this specific study is not along but that news organizations constantly try out different headlines using algorithms to elicit emotions and garner clicks or Facebook shares.[42] They say this Facebook study is no different than things people already accept. Still, others say that Facebook broke the law when conducting the experiment on user that didn’t give informed consent.[43]

text: The Facebook study controversy raises numerous questions about informed consent and the differences in the ethical review process between publicly and privately funded research. Some say Facebook was within its limits and others see the need for more informed consent and/or the establishment of in-house private review boards.[44]

text: Conflicts of interest[edit]

text: Other, long-standing controversies underscore the role for conflicts of interest among medical school faculty and researchers. For example, coverage of University of California (UC) medical school faculty members has included news of ongoing corporate payments to researchers and practitioners from companies that market and produce the very devices and treatments they recommend to patients.[45] Robert Pedowitz, the former chairman of UCLA’s orthopedic surgery department, reported concern that his colleague’s financial conflicts of interest could negatively affect patient care or research into new treatments.[46] In a subsequent lawsuit about whistleblower retaliation, the University provided a $10 million settlement to Pedowitz while acknowledging no wrongdoing.[46] Consumer Watchdog, an oversight group, observed that University of CA policies were “either inadequate or unenforced…Patients in UC hospitals deserve the most reliable surgical devices and medication…and they shouldn’t be treated as subjects in expensive experiments.”[45] Other UC incidents include taking the eggs of women for implantation into other women without consent[47] and injecting live bacteria into human brains, resulting in potentially premature deaths.[48]


document_title: Lost in Space (2018 TV series)

question_text: where was the netflix show lost in space filmed

root

text: Lost in Space (2018 TV series)

text: Premise[edit]

text: In the aftermath of an impact event that threatens the survival of humanity, the Robinson family is selected for the 24th mission of the Resolute (24th Colonist Group), an interstellar spacecraft carrying selected families to colonize the Alpha Centauri star system.

tag: p

text: Before they reach their destination, an alien robot breaches the Resolute's hull. Forced to evacuate the mothership in short-range Jupiter spacecraft, scores of colonists, among them the Robinsons, crash on a nearby habitable planet. There they must contend with a strange environment and battle their own personal demons as they search for a way back to the Resolute.[1]

text: Cast[edit]

text: Main[edit]

text:
Molly Parker as mission commander Maureen Robinson, an aerospace engineer taking her family on the mission to colonize Alpha Centauri in hopes of building a new life on a better world. Married to John Robinson, she is the biological mother of Judy, Penny, and Will Robinson.[3]
Toby Stephens as John Robinson, former U.S. Marine and husband to Maureen. He is adoptive father to Judy and biological father to Penny and Will.[4]
Maxwell Jenkins as 11-year-old Will Robinson, who forms a tight bond with the Robot, which he saves from destruction during a forest fire.[5]
Taylor Russell as 18-year-old Judy Robinson, who serves as mission doctor, having received accelerated medical training.[6][7]
Mina Sundwall as 15-year-old Penny Robinson.[7][8]
Ignacio Serricchio as Don West, ship's mechanic and smuggler of luxury goods. He is accompanied by Debbie, which he calls his lucky chicken.[9]
Parker Posey as June Harris, a criminal and psychopath who assumes the identity of her sister Jessica to take her place on the colony ship and subsequently impersonates Dr. Zachary Smith during the attack to take his seat on an evacuating Jupiter ship. After landing on the planet, Harris attempts to sabotage the colonists' chances of rescue by the Resolute, all the while manipulating and gaslighting other survivors to avoid prosecution for her crimes.[10] The theft of the doctor's identity is a reference to the corresponding character of Dr. Smith in the original television series.[11]
Brian Steele as the Robot,[12] an alien robot being that Will encounters following the crash. The robot has a different form from the ones that appeared in the previous series and film.[13]
Sibongile Mlambo as Angela Goddard,[14], a fellow survivor struggling with post traumatic stress disorder in the wake of her husband's death during the attack on the Resolute.

tag: ul

text: Recurring[edit]

text:
Raza Jaffrey as Victor Dhar, an officious politician whose arrogance and impatience mask an underlying sense of insecurity.[15]
Ajay Friese as Vijay Dhar, Victor's son and Penny's love interest
Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa as Hiroki Watanabe, scientist and friend of Maureen
Kiki Sukezane as Aiko Watanabe, Hiroki's daughter
Yukari Komatsu as Naoko Watanabe, Hiroki's wife
Veenu Sandhu as Prisha Dhar, Victor's wife
Adam Greydon Reid as Peter Beckert
Amelia Burstyn as Diane
Iain Belcher as Evan
Shaun Parkes as Captain Radic, commander of the Resolute

text: Guest[edit]

text:
Selma Blair as Jessica Harris, June's wealthy younger sister
Bill Mumy as Dr. Zachary Smith, the real Dr. Smith, whose identity June steals

text: Episodes[edit]

text: This section's plot summaries may be too long or excessively detailed. Please help improve them by removing unnecessary details and making them more concise. (May 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

tag: table

text:
No.TitleDirected byWritten byOriginal release date1"Impact"Neil MarshallMatt Sazama & Burk SharplessApril 13, 2018 (2018-04-13)
The spacecraft Resolute is carrying colonists, including the Robinson family, to Alpha Centauri. The Resolute is attacked and colonists escape in their Jupiter landing crafts but are hurled into a wormhole, crash-landing on an Earth-like planet. The Robinsons' craft, Jupiter 2, crashes into a glacial bed. The family evacuates before their craft sinks in rapidly freezing water. Eldest Robinson child Judy, a doctor, dives to the ship to retrieve power equipment. She becomes encased in ice, and with five hours of oxygen left in Judy's suit, John and son Will set out to collect magnesium that will melt the ice. Judy guides her sister, Penny, through a medical procedure to treat their injured mother, Maureen. Inside a cave, Will falls down a chasm, landing at the edge of a forest. Will finds a crashed alien ship and a dismembered robot that he helps to self-repair. In return, it saves Will as a forest fire nearly engulfs them. The family attempt to free Judy, but a sudden rainstorm hinders their progress. Will and the Robot arrive, and the Robot rescues Judy. In a flashback scene, a woman steals the identity of Dr. Zachary Smith and boards a Jupiter landing craft, along with Don West and Tam Roughneck.
2"Diamonds in the Sky"Neil MarshallMatt Sazama & Burk SharplessApril 13, 2018 (2018-04-13)
Don West, Smith, and Debbie the chicken survive the Jupiter 18 landing. While looking for other survivors, they find Angela Goddard, who is barely alive. When a storm approaches, Don and Angela take cover while Smith heads out. Meanwhile, the robot melts more ice to allow the Robinsons to start the process of recovering the Jupiter 2. Maureen, John, Will and the robot hike to another Jupiter crash site and then later to the robot's ship. They leave Penny and Judy behind, instructing them how to raise the ship out of the ice. Inside the alien ship, a holographic map of the planet is activated, showing John and Maureen they are in an unidentified galaxy. Outside, the robot touches the ship's hull, creating a mental connection to Will who learns what really happened on the Resolute. He decides to say nothing to his parents about the vision. When Penny sees the storm approaching and is unable to reach her parents to warn them, she raises the Jupiter 2 enough that the garage can be opened. She drives the ship's Chariot all-terrain vehicle to reach her family just in front of the storm. As they head back to Jupiter 2, they pass Don who sees them only to discover his flare gun is missing. The Robinsons see a flare and find Smith, who claims to be alone, returning with her to the Jupiter 2.
3"Infestation"Tim SouthamZack EstrinApril 13, 2018 (2018-04-13)
In a flashback, Dr. Smith is revealed to be June Harris, the older, ex-con sister of Jess Harris, a successful businesswoman. Jess offers June her entire estate as she is leaving Earth, but June drugs Jess and assumes her sister's identity. Aboard the Resolute, she bumps into her sister's lover and there is a struggle ending in him getting blown out an airlock. June is arrested but escapes during the robot's attack. In the present, Maureen explains they are trillions of light years from Earth. At night, the ice layer over Jupiter 2 cracks, endangering the ship. They rush to complete repairs, but the engines are losing fuel. When Will and the robot discover large eel-like creatures in the conduits, the robot locks Will, along with Smith, in the storeroom for safety. The glacier shifts, which forces the crew to make an emergency take-off after flushing the eels from the engines. They escape with just enough fuel to land near a forest region. Comms pick up radio communication from other survivors and also from Resolute, who are searching for survivors. Somebody hacks the onboard 3D printer to make a gun. Will finds it, and hides the gun under his mattress, unaware Smith is watching.
4"The Robinsons Were Here"Alice TroughtonKatherine CollinsApril 13, 2018 (2018-04-13)
Stuck without fuel, the family initiates Jupiter 2's colonization expansion protocol. Smith and Will discuss the robot, who does Will's bidding. Don West and Angela are rescued by the Watanabe family; Hiroki Watanabe reunites with John and Maureen at Jupiter 11 where Judy treats Angela. She tells Judy about the attack on Resolute. The Robinsons learn none of the other surviving families can fly due to the giant eels consuming fuel. John notices that one crash site is not a Jupiter ship. Maureen, John, and Don go there and discover the Resolute's comm dish. They realize the Resolute cannot hear them. Maureen also discovers contraband whiskey that Don smuggled aboard. Judy confronts Will about the robot, and he reveals he knew it attacked the Resolute. They decide to hide the robot in a nearby cave, unaware Smith is following them. On the way, they are spotted by Vijay Dhar, the son of another survivor group. Penny blackmails him to say nothing about the robot, having found and keeping an item he dropped. While away, Maureen and John discuss their marital problems. The next morning, the kids return to Jupiter 2 before their parents arrive. Smith talks to the robot inside the cave, attempting to instill distrust in it about Will. When John and Maureen return home, the kids tell them that the robot wandered away.
5"Transmission"Deborah ChowKari DrakeApril 13, 2018 (2018-04-13)
The surviving colonists build a light tower to try to signal the Resolute. Maureen, noticing strange weather phenomena, conducts an experiment using a weather balloon. She discovers the sun is paired with a black hole, and that the disturbances will only get worse until the planet is entirely uninhabitable. Will ignores Penny and Judy's advice to tell their father about the Robot. Penny develops a crush on Vijay, flirting with him as they move supplies. Don confronts Dr. Smith about the stolen flare gun, though she claims she took it by mistake. In a flashback, Maureen and the kids discuss pros versus cons of going to Alpha Centauri. Judy and Don discuss his smuggling activities. He also reveals his suspicions about Dr. Smith's identity. Judy confronts Dr. Smith about this, but she lies and instead casts doubt on Don. When the colonists activate the light signal, Dr. Smith sneaks away and shuts off the perimeter fence, allowing a large reptilian creature to enter the camp and destroy the light tower. Smith tells John about the kids hiding the robot.  When another creature shows up, Dr. Smith tells Will to call the robot. It saves the survivors, but only after Will tells it to defend itself against the creatures. It assumes its original multi-limb form to do this. The colonists witness all of this and recognize the robot from the attack on the Resolute.
6"Eulogy"Vincenzo NataliEd McCardieApril 13, 2018 (2018-04-13)
Maureen tells her family about the black hole but is afraid the other colonists might panic. John has a heated argument with the other survivors about the robot. In the end, despite an enraged Angela claiming it killed her husband, John convinces the community to allow the robot to stay and takes Will on a hike to discuss Will's responsibility for the robot's actions. He has Will fetch 27 large stones to build a memorial to the casualties. Don takes the community leader and Vijay's father, Victor Dhar, to his Jupiter which crashed in the desert where there are none of the eel-like creatures, and wants money for its fuel. Don also retrieves identification of the real Dr. Smith, later showing Judy. Maureen learns that Hiroki knows the planet is dying. Penny tells Vijay about the black hole but swears him to secrecy, and they share a kiss. Back at camp, Dr. Smith makes the distraught Angela recount the horrifying details of the robot attack. The emotional Angela enters the hub with the gun Dr. Smith has taken from Will's bunk and arranged for her to find. When she shoots at the robot it goes into attack mode and accidentally injures John before Will gets it to stop. Distraught, Will takes the robot to a cliff and orders it to walk off. He then places a stone on the memorial for the robot.
7"Pressurized"Tim SouthamVivian LeeApril 13, 2018 (2018-04-13)
While driving back to Jupiter 2, Judy is about to tell Dr. Smith she knows the truth about her when Don stops her. When Will is confronted by his mother, he confirms the robot 3D-printed the gun and that he hid it. Dr. Smith refuses blame for Angela's attack, and suggests Victor Dhar might have taken the gun. John and Maureen's rover gets stuck in a tar pit. As they sink to the bottom, Maureen admits to doctoring Will's test results. To escape the vehicle, Maureen uses the helium weather balloon to create a shielded path to the surface. Meanwhile, Smith locates the destroyed robot, but cannot get it to reassemble. Don's group speeds through a dangerous geyser field but a tube shakes loose and when Evan fixes the problem, a geyser blast flips the tanker on top of him. Victor realizes that a rock has punctured the tanker and if they move it they will lose most of the fuel. Despite this Don reluctantly sides with Judy and lifts the tanker, spilling the fuel, but Evan dies anyway. Back on Jupiter 2, Dr. Smith finally manages to reactivate the robot. When Victor returns home, Vijay tells him about the planet's coming demise. Victor decides to use what fuel they did retrieve to launch their own Jupiter 4.
8"Trajectory"Stephen SurjikKatherine Collins & Kari DrakeApril 13, 2018 (2018-04-13)
Maureen cannot talk Victor out of launching, but John sneaks aboard the Dhar's Jupiter 4 and triggers the emergency shut down. Later, he explains to the gathered colonists how the planet is about to become uninhabitable. Penny breaks off with Vijay for him telling his father. Maureen has a plan on how to launch despite the limited fuel, stripping out non-essential modules, and relying on old-school manual piloting. Judy tells Maureen the truth about the real Dr. Smith aboard Don's Jupiter. Returning to Jupiter 2, Maureen confines Dr. Smith to a holding cell. Dr. Smith now claims she is really Jessica Harris, a physicist. Maureen tells John about Smith, and he tells her that Don believes the Jupiter 4 is still too heavy to take off. With life support also removed, the pilot now needs a spacesuit and will need to withstand extreme G-forces. They select John, but not even he can regain consciousness fast enough to make all the maneuvers alone. When the Resolute sends a message that due to Hawking radiation they must leave the planet's orbit within 24 hours, Don reluctantly agrees to help pilot the ship. With his assistance the test run is a success. As John and Don launch in the Jupiter 4, Dr. Smith tricks Will and escapes to knock out Maureen right when John needs her instructions. With everyone watching, the ship explodes mid-air and John and Don are presumed dead.
9"Resurrection"Tim SouthamStory by : Daniel McLellan Teleplay by : Kari DrakeApril 13, 2018 (2018-04-13)
Will tries to signal his father using his radio, convinced he survived the explosion. Dr. Smith drives Maureen to the alien wreck, where she tells her she did not know Maureen was needed for the ship launch. She promises to help Maureen get her children off the planet, if she in return helps Dr. Smith with the alien ship. Will discovers that the rocks he collected in the cave are petrified biomass that can fuel the Jupiter ships to reach the Resolute. While the colonists gather to harvest the biomass, Judy leaves to find Maureen. The colonists find enough biomass to power all the Jupiters, but they must sneak it out quietly so as to not wake winged predators roosting in the cave. When John manages to send a signal, Penny and others are trapped inside the cave after the creatures wake up. Throughout the episode, flashbacks reveal the Christmas Star not to be a meteor but an alien craft, and that its engine was used to build Resolute. The robot's attack was an attempt to retrieve the stolen engine. The group trapped in the cave manage to narrowly escape. Judy tracks Smith and Maureen. She manages to disable Dr. Smith, but the robot reactivates and is revealed to obey the Doctor's commands.
10"Danger, Will Robinson"David NutterMatt Sazama & Burk SharplessApril 13, 2018 (2018-04-13)
John and Don survived the explosion and are clinging to ship wreckage in orbit, with only a few hours of oxygen left. Will is upset to learn the robot now serves Dr. Smith. John responds to Will, confirming that he and Don are still alive. Will tries to bond with the robot again but is rejected. Victor Dhar hails them from the Resolute, telling them it will leave in just over an hour. Maureen traps Dr Smith and the robot in order to search for John and Don. Just as they are about to retrieve them, Dr Smith and the robot escape. Maureen leads the robot into the garage as an alien ship arrives to retrieve the engine. When the alien robot is about to kill Will, his robot remembers him and attacks the alien robot, saving Will. In the fight, both robots are flung out into space and the garage ramp is damaged. Will goes outside the hull to manually close the hatch. Afterwards, he loses his grip but is saved by his father, who was rescued by Dr. Smith. With everyone safely back on the Jupiter, Maureen is grateful to Dr. Smith, but still locks her up. Before they can dock with the Resolute, the alien engine aboard the Jupiter 2 sends it and the Robinsons to a different galaxy. Will recognizes its shape from the robot's sand drawing: Danger.

text: Production[edit]

text: Development[edit]

text: In October 2014, it was announced that Legendary Television and Synthesis Entertainment were developing a new reboot of Lost in Space and had hired screenwriting duo Matt Sazama and Burk Sharpless to pen the pilot episodes.[16] In November 2015, Netflix landed the project.[17][18] On June 29, 2016, Netflix ordered a full 10 episode season of Lost in Space, with Zack Estrin as executive producer and showrunner. Sazama, Sharpless, Kevin Burns, Jon Jashni, Neil Marshall, and Marc Helwig also serve as executive producers.[19]

text: Filming[edit]

text: Production on the first season began in February 2017, in Vancouver, British Columbia, and concluded in July 2017.[20][21]

text: Release[edit]

text: The series was released on April 13, 2018, on Netflix.[1] On March 31, 2018, the series pilot was screened at Awesome Con in Washington, D.C..[22]

text: Reception[edit]

text: The review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes reported a 68% approval rating with an average rating of 6.21/10, based on 65 reviews. The website's critical consensus reads: "Lost in Space's production values are ambitious enough to attract sci-fi adventure fans, while the story's large heart adds an emotional anchor to all the deep space derring-do."[23] Metacritic, which uses a weighted average, assigned a normalized score of 58 out of 100 based on 27 critics, indicating "mixed or average reviews".[24]

text: David Griffin of IGN gave the first season a rating of 8.5/10, calling it "an excellent sci-fi adventure with a slight villain problem," giving particular praise to the Robinson family, while criticizing Parker Posey's Dr. Smith as an unsophisticated and one-dimensional character who lacks redeeming qualities.[25] In contrast, Jen Chaney of Vulture characterized Posey's performance as providing "understated, sly comedic touches".[26]


document_title: Old MacDonald Had a Farm

question_text: where did the song old macdonald come from

text: Old MacDonald Had a Farm

text: Early versions[edit]

text: In the 1917 book Tommy's Tunes, a collection of World War I era songs by F. T. Nettleingham,[2] the song "Ohio" has quite similar lyrics—though with a slightly different farmer's name and refrain:

text: This version lists seven species of animal: some dogs (bow-wow), some hens (cluck cluck), some ducks (quack quack), some cows (moo moo), some pigs (oink oink), some cats (meow meow), and a donkey (hee-haw).[3]

text: The Traditional Ballad Index consider the Tommy's Tunes version to be the earliest known version of "Old Macdonald Had a Farm", though it cites numerous variants, some of them much older.[1]

text: Two of these variants were published in Vance Randolph's Ozark Folksongs in 1980. One was "Old Missouri", sung by a Mr. H. F. Walker of Missouri in 1922, a version that names different parts of the mule rather than different animals:

text: A British version of the song, called "The Farmyard, or The Merry Green Fields," was collected in 1908 from a 74-year-old Mrs. Goodey at Marylebone Workhouse, London, and published in Cecil Sharp's Collection of English Folk Songs.

text: Perhaps the earliest recorded member of this family of songs is a number from an opera called The Kingdom of the Birds, published in 1719-1720 in Thomas D'Urfey's Wit and Mirth, or Pills to Purge Melancholy:

text: Translations[edit]

text: The lyrics have been translated into other languages and modified slightly to fit rhythmic and cultural requirements. It is still sung as a children's song to the same tune.

text:
An Egyptian Arabic version of the song exists, with Geddo Ali (Grandpa Ali, Egyptian Arabic: جدو على) being the farmer character.
The Italian version is Nella vecchia fattoria (In The Old Farm). The farmer is Zio Tobia (uncle Tobias).
The German version is Onkel Jörg hat einen Bauernhof.[4] An alternative version is Old MacDonald hat 'ne Farm (short for eine Farm), keeping the English name of the farmer, and translating the rest quite literally.
In Spanish it is En la granja de Pepito, El Viejo MacDonald tenia una granja, El granjero tenía un campo or En la vieja factoría.
In Danish it is Jens Hansen havde en bondegård (literally "Jens Hansen had a farm") and in Swedish it goes Per Olsson hade en bonnagård.
In Portuguese, the most common version is Na quinta do tio Manel (meaning "On the farm of Uncle Manel"), with alternate versions Seu Lobato tinha um sítio or even O velho McDonald tinha uma fazenda (literally "Old MacDonald Had a Farm").
In Polish it is Stary Donald farmę miał (meaning "Old Donald had a farm") or Pan McDonald farmę miał (meaning "Mr. McDonald had a farm").
In French, Dans la ferme de Mathurin (literally "In Mathurin's Farm").
In Turkish version "Ali Baba'nın Bir Çiftliği Var" (literally: "Ali Baba Has A Farm")
In Slovene version Na kmetiji je lepo (literally: On a farm it is beautiful), it can be a children's song, a naughty song or, at least in some versions of the song, the lyrics have been made from childish into vulgar, like a drinking song.
In Hebrew לדוד משה הייתה חווה (LaDod Moshe hayta hava) or Uncle Moshe Had a Farm. This version was translated by Avraham Broshi.
In Chinese there are several versions of the song in same tune. The most popular is 王老先生有块地 (Wáng lǎo xiānshēng yǒu kuài dì), or Old Mr. Wang Had Some Land.
In Japanese version ゆかいな牧場 (Yukai-na Makiba, literally: "Happy Farm"), Ichiro, Jiro and Saburo are the farmers who have animals.
In Japanese version マックのおじさん (Makku no Ojisan, literally: "Old man Mac"), sounds playfully like the Western version.
In Kansai Japanese, there is a parody song called 大阪うまいもんの歌 (Osaka Umaimon no Uta, literally: "Yummy foods in Osaka") made by an Osakan puppet play troupe in 1993.
In Malay version Pak Atan Ada Ladang ( Uncle Atan Had a Farm)
In Serbian Svako jutro jedno jaje organizmu snagu daje (One egg per day gives the strength to human organism)　has the same melody.
In Korean version '그래 그래서' (geulae geulaeseo, literally: "So And"). Old Mr. Park had a farm and animals.
In Finnish version "Piippolan vaarilla oli talo" (literally: "Grandpa Piippola had a house")
In Czech it's called "Strýček Donald farmu měl" which translates to "Uncle Donald had a farm"
In Persian version it's called "پیرمرد مهربون " meaning "kind old man" instead of old Mac Donald.

text: Recordings and appearances in media[edit]

text: This article appears to contain trivial, minor, or unrelated references to popular culture. Please reorganize this content to explain the subject's impact on popular culture rather than simply listing appearances; add references to reliable sources if possible, otherwise delete it. (October 2017)

text: The oldest version listed in The Traditional Ballad Index is the Sam Patterson Trio's "Old MacDonald Had a Farm," released on the Edison label in 1925. This was followed by a version by Gid Tanner & His Skillet Lickers, "Old McDonald Had a Farm" (Columbia Records, 1927) and "McDonald's Farm" by Warren Caplinger's Cumberland Mountain Entertainers (Brunswick Records, 1928).[5] In 1954, the composition was arranged for accordion sextet and recorded for RCA Thesaurus transcriptions by John Serry Sr. in the United States.

text: Other popular versions are by Frank Sinatra (Capitol, 1960), Harry Connick Jr., Elvis Presley (in his movie Double Trouble), Nat King Cole, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Ella Fitzgerald (on her 1967 Verve album Whisper Not)., Flatt & Scruggs, Spike Jones and his City Slickers,[6] The Three Stooges, Sesame Street cast, Gene Autry, The Kelly Family[7] and Nikki Yanofsky.[8]

text: A rock music version was recorded by The Isley Brothers in the 1950s, and in 1961 an instrumental version was recorded by The Piltdown Men as "McDonald's Cave."

text: A variant was used in a 1952 campaign ad for Adlai Stevenson II's unsuccessful campaign for President with slightly altered lyrics promoting the Stevenson campaign's appeal to farmers.[9]

text: The song is played (with some cast participation) in the 1951 movie The Lavender Hill Mob.[10]

text: Kidsongs recorded "A Day At Old MacDonald's Farm" for video and CD release in 1985.[11] The Australian children's television show Play School recorded a version of this song on the album, There's A Bear In There.