consent question

my sister, brother, and i were discussing the subject of individual rights. the discussion ended when a question which noone could answer. a male patient is in the hospital and his physician has ordered some tests and procedures be run. one of them happened to be a test in which the patient lay supine on a exam table, with a large semi-circular machine to his right, containing a camera. this semi circle was then moved over the patient, and centered with the camera directly positioned over the chest. the effect was that the patient lay there with this semi circular machine with camera laying across his chest, almost touching. if patient exhaled he would come into contact with the machine, whose excess extended on both sides. while test was taking place the patient could not move his upper body, pinned down by the camera. patient was extremely claustrophobic and could not tolerate this. this particular test would reveal more detailed pictures and information about the heart and what might be wrong. the patient, therefore, because he deemed this test to be a necessary intervention, asked to be sedated in order to tolerate this. here's where the discussion ended. what might be the physician's response to sedating the patient? realizing there would be risks involved in being anesthesized, the patient assured everyone he would accept these risks in order to have the test ran. does the patient have this right? and finally, should he have this right? thank you. joe:idea: