Did My Brain Implant Make Me Do It? Questions Raised by DBS Regarding Psychological Continuity, Responsibility for Action and Mental Competence

Klaming, Laura; Haselager, Pim

doi:10.1007/s12152-010-9093-1

Cited by 98 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, think of the use of moral bioenhancement within criminal justice settings, should we hold the criminal justice system or the offender responsible for adverse, unwanted behavioral effects, or both? [see, e.g., 45,54,55] that passive interventions ought to be accompanied by supportive interventions that actively involve the subject of the intervention. In general, passive interventions aimed at moral enhancement should be treated especially cautious compared to active interventions both with respect to their overall moral acceptability and with respect to their potential use within the criminal justice and public health domain.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral Enhancement: Do Means Matter Morally?

Focquaert

Schermer²

2015

Neuroethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the reasons why moral enhancement may be controversial, is because the advantages of moral enhancement may fall upon society rather than on those who are enhanced. If directed at individuals with certain counter-moral traits it may have direct societal benefits by lowering immoral behavior and increasing public safety, but it is not directly clear if this also benefits the individual in question. In this paper, we will discuss what we consider to be moral enhancement, how different means may be used to achieve it and whether the means we employ to reach moral enhancement matter morally. Are certain means to achieve moral enhancement wrong in themselves? Are certain means to achieve moral enhancement better than others, and if so, why? More specifically, we will investigate whether the difference between direct and indirect moral enhancement matters morally. Is it the case that indirect means are morally preferable to direct means of moral enhancement and can we indeed pinpoint relevant intrinsic, moral differences between both? We argue that the distinction between direct and indirect means is indeed morally relevant, but only insofar as it tracks an underlying distinction between active and passive interventions. Although passive interventions can be ethical provided specific safeguards are put in place, these interventions exhibit a greater potential to compromise autonomy and disrupt identity.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral Enhancement: Do Means Matter Morally?

Focquaert

Schermer²

2015

Neuroethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Within neuroscience there are also debates about whether therapies like DBS may influence some patients' mental states to such an extent that it affects the individual's personal identity (Klaming & Haselager 2013). One example highlights how the individual's experience of psychological continuity is disturbed when the patient becomes overwhelmed by bad childhood memories during treatment with DBS (Goethals et al 2008).…”

Section: Journal Of Current Cultural Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Sci-Fi Brain: Narratives in Neuroscience and Popular Culture

Alftberg

Bengtsen

2018

Cult. Unbound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The connection between neuroscience, popular media and lay perceptions of the brain involves the framing of complex scientific processes and results through familiar cultural narratives and metaphors. Such narratives are often built on the premise that neuroscience, with the help of powerful new technologies, will finally solve the mysteries of brain and mind, consciousness and morality. At the same time, popular culture-especially the science fiction genre-tends to focus on worst case scenarios of the implementation of technology. This article explores cultural narratives of what the brain is and how it functions in two different contexts-among neuroscientists and within popular culture. In particular, narratives about technology and the malleable brain as well as the notion of the mad scientist are studied. The article explores how these narratives are presented and used in popular culture and how neuroscientists relate to the narratives when describing their work. There is a contrast, but also a blurring of boundaries, between actual research carried out and the fictional portrayals of scientists constructing, or altering, fully functional brains. To some extent, the narratives serve as a background for the public's understanding of, and attitude towards, neuroscience-something that must be taken into consideration when dealing with the therapeutic treatment of patients. The narratives of neuroscience in popular culture are to a certain degree shaped by actual scientific practices and findings, but neuroscience is also influenced by laypeople's perceptions, which often have their roots in the narratives of popular culture.

show abstract

“…This has to be done in order to determine the therapeutical aim for psychiatric patients, who are not able to provide the same personality because of the severe disease any more as well as for patients that show new symptoms and changes in personalities after their treatment. Consequently ''this raises the question whether the treating physicians or a legal representative should interfere in the decision or be able to cancel the treatment at a later point in time in order to protect the patient from any (further) changes to his identity, which could undermine the patient's autonomy'' (Klaming and Haselager 2013). When defining a Ulysses contract in advance, there have to be precisely defined criteria that determine the need of an intervention and stop of the stimulation by both the treating physician and the legal representative.…”

Section: The Influence Of Dbs On the Components Of Autonomous Actionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ethics of deep brain stimulation (DBS)

Oduncu

2015

Med Health Care and Philos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an invasive technique designed to stimulate certain deep brain regions for therapeutic purposes and is currently used mainly in patients with neurodegenerative disorders, such as Parkinson's disease. However, DBS is also used increasingly for other experimental applications, such as the treatment of psychiatric disorders (e.g. severe depression), weight reduction. Apart from its therapeutic potential, DBS can cause severe adverse effects, some that might also have a significant impact on the patient's personality and autonomy by the external stimulation of DBS which effects lie beyond the individual's control and free will. The article's purpose is to outline the procedures of DBS currently used in therapeutic and experimental applications and to discuss the ethical concerns regarding this procedure. It will address the clinical benefit-risk-ratio, the particular ethics of research in this field, and the ethical issues raised by affecting a patient's or an individual's personality and autonomous behaviour. Moreover, a potential ethical guideline, the Ulysses contract is discussed for the field of clinical application as well as the question of responsibility.

show abstract

Did My Brain Implant Make Me Do It? Questions Raised by DBS Regarding Psychological Continuity, Responsibility for Action and Mental Competence

Cited by 98 publications

References 53 publications

Moral Enhancement: Do Means Matter Morally?

Moral Enhancement: Do Means Matter Morally?

The Sci-Fi Brain: Narratives in Neuroscience and Popular Culture

The ethics of deep brain stimulation (DBS)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About