Abstract
Drawing together substantive examples from three case studies: bioinformation derived from personal health records; regenerative devices; and donated oocytes I here begin to build a theory of the emplacement and constitution of personality in a techne-mediated world; of how and where it might be located and defended in law. Personality here subsists in new, more virtual, registers. In exploring the parallels between these cases my intention is to explicate what happens when historical understandings of the generation and transmission of personality are disrupted and how concepts such as dominion; culpability and belonging could, or should, be sustained or nuanced in response as we enter a brave new world in which personalities have no clear genealogy or legal standing.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ayuso, M, Bravo, J, Holzmann, R 2018, Getting life expectancy estimates right for pension policy: period versus cohort approach, Discussion paper series IZA Institute of Labour Economics, available at http://ftp.iza.org/dp11512.pdf.
Bennett, J 2009, Vibrant matter: a political ecology of things. Duke University Press, Durham.
Bently, L 2010, ‘Identity and the law’, in G Walker & E Leedham-Green (eds), Identity: the Darwin College lecture series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Bishop, C & Eby, T 2010, ‘The current status of audiologic rehabilitation for profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss’, The Laryngoscope, vol. 120, no. 3, pp. 552–556.
Boyd, D 2018, ‘Recognizing the rights of nature: lofty rhetoric or legal revolution?’ Natural Resources & Environment, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 13–17.
Capogrosso, M, Milekovic, T, Borton, D, Wagner, F, Moraud, E, Mignardot, J et al. 2016, ‘A brain–spine interface alleviating gait deficits after spinal cord injury in primates’, Nature, vol. 539, no. 7628, p. 284.
Chader, G, Weiland, J, Humayun, M, Verhaagen, J, Hol, E, Huitenga, I et al. 2009, ‘Artificial vision: needs, functioning, and testing of a retinal electronic prosthesis’, Progress in Brain Research, vol. 175, pp. 317–332.
Coates, A 2017, ‘Is this Chimpanzee a non-human person?’, The Independent, 13 September, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/is-this-chimpanzee-a-non-human-person-a7941876.html.
Dougherty, D, Rezai, A, Carpenter, L, Howland, R, Bhati, M, O’Reardon, J et al. 2015, ‘A randomized sham-controlled trial of deep brain stimulation of the ventral capsule/ventral striatum for chronic treatment-resistant depression’, Biological Psychiatry, vol. 78, no. 4, pp. 240–248.
Ebeling, M 2016, Healthcare and big data: digital specters and phantom objects. Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills.
Fletcher, E & Greferath, U 2010, ‘Electronic restoration of vision: science fiction or reality?’, Clinical and Experimental Optometry, vol. 93, no. 2, pp. 59–60.
Giroux, M & De Lorenzi, M 2011, ‘Putting the child first: a necessary step in the recognition of the right to identity’, Canadian Journal of Family Law, vol. 27, pp. 53–94.
Inkster, B, Stillwell, D, Kosinski, M & Jones, P 2016, ‘A decade into Facebook: where is psychiatry in the digital age?’, Lancet Psychiatry, vol. 3, no. 11, pp. 1087–1090, available at https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(16)30041-4.
Louveris, P 2014, https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=EP%2FL005859%2F1.
Maloney, M 2018, ‘Environmental law: changing the legal status of nature: recent developments and future possibilities’, LSJ: Law Society of NSW Journal, vol. 49, p. 78.
Margil, M 2017, ‘India court declares “personhood” of glaciers and ecosystems’, Press Statement, 3 April, http://celdf.org/2017/04/pr-india-court-declares-personhood-glaciers-ecosystems/, 27 April 2017.
Mayer-Schönberger, V & Cukier, K 2013, Big data: a revolution that will transform how we live, work and think. John Murray, London.
Meloni, R, Mallet, J & Faucon Biguet, N 2011, ‘Brain gene transfer and brain implants’, Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 1–17, https://doi.org/10.2202/1941-6008.1141.
Ng, Kenney et al. 2015, ‘Personalized predictive modeling and risk factor identification using patient similarity’, AMIJoint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIJoint Summits on Translational Science, vol. 132, no. 6, p. 2.
O’Donnell, E 2017, ‘At the intersection of the sacred and the legal: rights for nature in Uttarakhand, India’, Journal of Environmental Law, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 135–144.
Ovadia, D & Bottini, G 2015, ‘Neuroethical implications of deep brain stimulation in degenerative disorders’, Current opinion in neurology, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 598–603.
Parry, B 2018, ‘The social life of “scaffolds” examining human rights in regenerative medicine’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 95–120.
Parry, B & Greenhough, B 2017, Bioinformation. Polity Press, London.
Pham, U, Solbakk, A, Skogseid, I, Toft, M, Pripp, A, Konglund, A et al. 2015, ‘Personality changes after deep brain stimulation in Parkinson’s disease’, Parkinson’s Disease, pp. 1–8.
Prainsack, B 2015, ‘Three H’s for health—the darker side of big data’, Bioethica Forum, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 40–41.
Rak, J 2017, ‘Radical connections: genealogy, small lives, big data’, a/b: Auto/Biography Studies, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 479–497.
Salling, M & Martinez, D 2016, ‘Brain stimulation in addiction’, Neuropsychopharmacology, vol. 41, no. 12, pp. 2798–2809.
Smith, B 1928, ‘Legal personality’, Yale Law Journal, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 283–299, available at http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/ylj/vol37/iss3/1.
Staker, A 2017, ‘Should chimpanzees have standing? The case for pursuing legal personhood for non-human animals’, Transnational Environmental Law, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 485–507.
Stone, C 1972, ‘Should trees have standing? Toward legal rights for natural objects’, Southern California Law Review, vol. 45, pp. 450–501.
Teubner, G 2018, Digital personhood? The status of autonomous software agents in private law, available at SSRN https://ssrn.com/abstract=3177096 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3177096.
Tripodes, Z 2015, ‘Gelman v. Uruguay Loyola Los Angeles’, International and Comparative Law Review, vol. 37, pp. 1861–1885.
Waldby, C 2019, The oocyte economy: the changing meaning of human eggs. Duke University Press, Durham.
Weber, G, Mandl, K & Kohane, I 2014, ‘Finding the missing link for big biomedical data’, The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 331, no. 24, pp. 2479–2480.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Parry, B. (2020). Spectral Personas: Exploring the Constitution and Legal Standing of “Virtual Personhood”. In: de Leeuw, M., van Wichelen, S. (eds) Personhood in the Age of Biolegality. Biolegalities. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27848-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27848-9_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-27847-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-27848-9
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)