Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Bonding Brains to Machines: Ethical Implications of Electroceuticals for the Human Brain

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Neuroethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Novel neurotechnologies like deep brain stimulation and brain-computer interfaces promise clinical benefits for severely suffering patients. Nevertheless, such electroceuticals raise several ethical issues on different levels: while on the level of clinical neuroethics issues with direct relevance for diagnosis and treatment have to be discussed, on the level of research neuroethics questions regarding research and development of these technological devices like investigating new targets and different diseases as well as thorough inclusion criteria are dealt with. On the level of theoretical neuroethics more general questions are examined including anthropological considerations on “normal” human functioning as well as implications on personality, personal identity and authenticity. This paper presents a brief review on ethical issues of deep brain stimulation and brain computer interfacing and simultaneously introduces to this themed issue with thirteen contributions dealing from different perspectives with ethical implications of electroceuticals for the human brain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Famm, K., B. Litt, K.J. Tracey, E.S. Boyden, and M. Slaoui. 2013. A jump-start for electroceuticals. Nature 496(7444): 159–161. doi:10.1038/496159a.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Deuschl, G., C. Schade-Brittinger, P. Krack, J. Volkmann, H. Schafer, K. Bötzel, C. Daniels, et al. 2006. A randomized trial of deep-brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease. The New England Journal of Medicine 355(9): 896–908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Deuschl, G., J. Raethjen, H. Hellriegel, and R. Elble. 2011. Treatment of patients with essential tremor. Lancet Neurology 10(2): 148–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mehrkens, J.H., K. Botzel, U. Steude, K. Zeitler, A. Schnitzler, V. Sturm, and J. Voges. 2009. Long-term efficacy and safety of chronic globus pallidus internus stimulation in different types of primary dystonia. Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery 87(1): 8–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schuepbach, W.M., J. Rau, K. Knudsen, J. Volkmann, P. Krack, L. Timmermann, T.D. Halbig, et al. 2013. Neurostimulation for Parkinson’s disease with early motor complications. The New England Journal of Medicine 368(7): 610–622. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1205158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Andrade, P., L.H. Noblesse, Y. Temel, L. Ackermans, L.W. Lim, H.W. Steinbusch, and V. Visser-Vandewalle. 2010. Neurostimulatory and ablative treatment options in major depressive disorder: a systematic review. Acta Neurochirurgica 152(4): 565–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Greenberg, B.D., S.L. Rauch, and S.N. Haber. 2010. Invasive circuitry-based neurotherapeutics: stereotactic ablation and deep brain stimulation for OCD. Neuropsychopharmacology 35(1): 317–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Laxton, A.W., D.F. Tang-Wai, M.P. McAndrews, D. Zumsteg, R. Wennberg, R. Keren, J. Wherrett, et al. 2010. A phase I trial of deep brain stimulation of memory circuits in Alzheimer’s disease. Annals of Neurology 68(4): 521–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hamani, C., M.P. McAndrews, M. Cohn, M. Oh, D. Zumsteg, C.M. Shapiro, R.A. Wennberg, and A.M. Lozano. 2008. Memory enhancement induced by hypothalamic/fornix deep brain stimulation. Annals of Neurology 63(1): 119–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Schiff, N.D., J.T. Giacino, K. Kalmar, J.D. Victor, K. Baker, M. Gerber, B. Fritz, et al. 2007. Behavioural improvements with thalamic stimulation after severe traumatic brain injury. Nature 448(7153): 600–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Müller, U.J., V. Sturm, J. Voges, H.J. Heinze, I. Galazky, M. Heldmann, H. Scheich, and B. Bogerts. 2009. Successful treatment of chronic resistant alcoholism by deep brain stimulation of nucleus accumbens: first experience with three cases. Pharmacopsychiatry 42(6): 288–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bell, E., G. Mathieu, and E. Racine. 2009. Preparing the ethical future of deep brain stimulation. Surgical Neurology 72(6): 577–586. discussion 586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Clausen, J. 2009. Man, machine and in between. Nature 457(7233): 1080–1081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Clausen, J. 2010. Ethical brain stimulation – neuroethics of deep brain stimulation in research and clinical practice. European Journal of Neuroscience 32(7): 1152–1162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Clausen, J. 2011. Conceptual and ethical issues with brain-hardware devices. Current Opinion in Psychiatry 24(6): 495–501. doi:10.1097/YCO.0b013e32834bb8ca.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Schermer, M. 2011. Ethical issues in deep brain stimulation. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience 5: 17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Synofzik, M., and T.E. Schlaepfer. 2011. Electrodes in the brain–ethical criteria for research and treatment with deep brain stimulation for neuropsychiatric disorders. Brain Stimulation 4(1): 7–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Synofzik, M., and T.E. Schlaepfer. 2008. Stimulating personality: ethical criteria for deep brain stimulation in psychiatric patients and for enhancement purposes. Biotechnology Journal 3(12): 1511–1520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Schermer, Maartje. 2013. Health, happieness and human enhancement - dealing with unexpected effects of deep brain stimulation. Neuroethics 6 (3). doi:10.1007/s12152-011-9097-5.

  20. Focquaert, F. 2013. Deep brain stimulation in children: parental authority versus shared decision-making. Neuroethics 6(3).

  21. Johansson, Veronica, Martin Garwicz, Martin Kanje, Helena Röcklingsberg, Jens Schouenborg, Anders Tingström, and Ulf Görman. 2013. Byond blind optimism and unfounded fears: deep brain stimulation for treatment resistant depression. Neuroethics 6 (3). doi:10.1007/s12152-011-9112-x.

  22. Kraemer, Felicitas. 2013. Me, myself and my brain implant: deep brain stimulation raises questions of personal authenticity and alienation. Neuroethics 6 (3). doi: 10.107/s12152-011-9115-7.

  23. Schuepbach, M., M. Gargiulo, M.L. Welter, C. Luc Mallet, J.L. Behar, D. Houeto, D. Maltete, V. Mesnage, and Y. Agid. 2006. Neurosurgery in Parkinson disease: a distressed mind in a repaired body? Neurology 66(12): 1811–1816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Witt, Karsten, Jens Kuhn, Lars Timmermann, and Christiane Woopen. 2013. Deep brain stimulation and the search for identity. Neuroethics 6 (3). doi:10.1007/s12152-011-9100-1.

  25. Baylis, F. 2013. “I am Who I Am”: on the perceived threats to personal identity from deep brain stimulation. Neuroethics 6(3).

  26. Klaming, L., and P. Haselager. 2013. Did my brain implant make me do it? questions raised by DBS regarding psychological continuity, responsibility for action and mental competence. Neuroethics 6(3). doi:10.1007/s12152-010-9093-1.

  27. van Gerven, M., J. Farquhar, R. Schaefer, R. Vlek, J. Geuze, A. Nijholt, Nick Ramsey, et al. 2009. The brain-computer interface cycle. Journal of Neural Engineering 6(4): 041001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Birbaumer, N., and L.G. Cohen. 2007. Brain-computer interfaces: communication and restoration of movement in paralysis. The Journal of Physiology 579(3): 621–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Collinger, J.L., B. Wodlinger, J.E. Downey, W. Wang, E.C. Tyler-Kabara, D.J. Weber, A.J. McMorland, M. Velliste, M.L. Boninger, and A.B. Schwartz. 2013. High-performance neuroprosthetic control by an individual with tetraplegia. Lancet 381(9866): 557–564. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61816-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Arnold, L.E., N. Lofthouse, S. Hersch, X. Pan, E. Hurt, B. Bates, K. Kassouf, S. Moone, and C. Grantier. 2013. EEG Neurofeedback for ADHD: Double-Blind Sham-Controlled Randomized Pilot Feasibility Trial. J Atten Disord 17(5): 410–419. doi:10.1177/1087054712446173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Jotterand, Fabrice, and James Giordano. 2014 (in press). Real-time Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (rtfMRI)-Brain Computer Interfacing in the Assessment and Treatment of Psychopathy : Potential and Challenges. In Handbook of Neuroethics, eds. Jens Clausen, and Neil Levy. Berlin: Springer.

  32. Clausen, J. 2008. Moving minds: ethical aspects of neural motor prostheses. Biotechnology Journal 3(12): 1493–1501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. O’Brolcháin, Fiachra, and Bert Gordijn. 2014 in press. BCIs for enhancement purposes: ethical implications. In Handbook of Neuroethics, eds. Jens Clausen, and Neil Levy. Berlin: Springer.

  34. Tamburrini, G. 2009. Brain to computer communication: ethical perspectives on interaction models. Neuroethics 2(3): 137–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Matthias, A. 2004. The responsibility gap: ascribing responsibility for the actions of learning automata. Ethics and Information Technology 6(3): 175–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Holm, Søren, and Teck Chuan Voo. 2010. Brain-Machine Interfaces and Personal Responsibility for Action - Maybe Not As Complicated After All. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 4 (3):Article 7.

  37. Phillips, L. H. 2006. Communicating with the ‘locked-in’ patient: because you can so it, should you? Neurology Vol. 67 (3): 380-381

  38. Bruno, M.-A., L.J. Bernheim, D. Ledoux, F. Pellas, A. Demertzi, and S. Laureys. 2011. A survey on self-assessed well-being in a cohort of chronic locked-in syndrome patients: happy majority, miserable minority. BMJ Open. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2010-000039.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Vlek, R.J., D. Steines, D. Szibbo, A. Kubler, M.J. Schneider, P. Haselager, and F. Nijboer. 2012. Ethical issues in brain-computer interface research, development, and dissemination. Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy 36(2): 94–99. doi:10.1097/NPT.0b013e31825064cc.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Neijboer, F., J. Clausen, B.Z. Allison, and P. Haselager. 2013. The asilomar survey: stakeholders’ opinions on ethical issues related to brain-computer interfacing. Neuroethics 6(3). doi:10.1007/s12152-011-9132-6.

  41. Kyselo, M. 2013. Locked-in Syndrome, and BCI – Towards an enactive approach of the self. Neuroethics 6(3).

  42. Fenton, A., and S. Alpert. 2008. Extending our view on using BCIs for locked-in syndrome. Neuroethics 1: 119–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Buller, T. 2013. Neurotechnology, Invasiveness and the extended mind. Neuroethics 6(3).

  44. Wolbring, G. 2013. Hearing beyond the normal enabled by therapeutic devices: the role of the recipient and the hearing profession. Neuroethics 6(3). doi:10.1007/s12152-011-9120-x.

  45. Jebari, Karim. 2013. Brain Machine Interfaces and Human Enhancement - An Ethical Review Neuroethics 6 (3).

Download references

Acknowledgment

This special issue traces back to the panel “Bonding Brian to Machines” at the World Congress for Bioethics in Singapore 2010. A call for abstracts on ethical issues in DBS and articles submitted independently to this journal completed the contribution at hand. The author wants to thank all speakers at the Singapore panel and all contributors to this special issue.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Werner Reichardt Centre for Integrative Neuroscience (CIN), Tübingen, Germany

    Jens Clausen

  2. International Centre for Ethics in Science and Humanities, Tübingen, Germany

    Jens Clausen

  3. Institute for Ethics and History of Medicine, Gartenstr. 47, 72074, Tübingen, Germany

    Jens Clausen

Authors
  1. Jens Clausen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jens Clausen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Clausen, J. Bonding Brains to Machines: Ethical Implications of Electroceuticals for the Human Brain. Neuroethics 6, 429–434 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-013-9186-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-013-9186-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation