Regarding consent my personal judgement would be that Milgrim had not received the participants fully informed consent; as they did not know the full extent of the study, by today's guidelines I would say that it would have been deemed unethical. Milgrim could justify this with the fact that had they had required the full consent, they would have had to give all the information on the study to the participants this would render the whole study inaccurate as in any instance of observation the subject being studied may change his/her behaviour without realising.

DECEPTION

Without a doubt by today's guidelines the deception in this study was unethical, the participants were mislead throughout the whole study, they were lead to believe it was an equal chance they may be picked as the "learner", they were led to believe they were delivering real electric shocks and many more...