Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Models of Engagement in Neuroethics Programs: Past, Present, and Future

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Debates About Neuroethics

Part of the book series: Advances in Neuroethics ((AIN))

Abstract

This chapter surveys models for ethics engagement in neuroscience research and training and offers suggestions for future development. We review different ways in which ethics programs have sought to partner with neuroscience programs and critically align neuroscience with its ethical, legal, social, and policy implications. We compare the methods of neuroethics programs with other ethics programs associated with the biomedical sciences to elucidate current levels of interdisciplinary collaboration and the potential for expansion in the future. Based on our findings, we explore ways by which neuroethics can proactively seek new approaches to link with neuroscience and medicine.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This type of project is not unique to the USA, and is also present in the UK in the context of synthetic biology and nanotechnology (Balmer et al. 2015).

References

  • Abelson J, Eyles J (2004) Public participation and citizen governance in the Canadian health system. Changing Health Care in Canada: The Romanow Papers, vol 2, pp 279–311

    Google Scholar 

  • Balmer AS, Calvert J, Marris C, Molyneux-Hodgson S, Frow E, Kearnes M et al (2015) Taking roles in interdisciplinary collaborations: reflections on working in post-ELSI spaces in the UK synthetic biology community. Sci Technol Stud 28(3):3–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett I, Sarewitz D (2006) Too little, too late? Research policies on the societal implications of nanotechnology in the United States. Sci Cult 15(4):309–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess M (2004) Public consultation in ethics: an experiment in representative ethics. J Bioeth Inq 1(1):4–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess M, O’Doherty K, Secko D (2008) Biobanking in British Columbia: discussions of the future of personalized medicine through deliberative public engagement. Pers Med 5(3):285–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler R, Dwosh E, Beattie BL, Guimond C, Lombera S, Brief E et al (2009) Genetic counseling for early-onset familial Alzheimer disease in a large aboriginal kindred from a remote community in British Columbia: unique challenges and possible solutions. J Genet Couns 5(4):90–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabrera L, Beattie LB, Dwosh E, Illes J (2015) Converging approaches to understanding early onset familial Alzheimer disease: A First Nation study. SAGE Open Medicine 3

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabrera L, Tesluk J, Matthews R, Chakraborti M, Illes J (2016) Brain matters: from environmental ethics to environmental neuroethics. Environ Health 15:20–25

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Campo-Engelstein L, Rodriguez SB (2011) Two chicks in a lab with eggs. Hast Cent Rep 41(3):21–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho MK, Tobin SL, Greely HT, McCormick J, Boyce A, Magnus D (2008) Strangers at the benchside: research ethics consultation. Am J Bioeth 8(3):4–13

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Crooks A, Li N, Snyder J, Dharamsi S, Benjaminy S, Jacob KJ et al (2015) “You don’t want to lose that trust that you’ve built with this patient…”: (dis)trust, medical tourism, and the Canadian family physician-patient relationship. BMC Fam Pract 16:25

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickinson HD (2002) How can the public be meaningfully involved in developing and maintaining an overall vision for the health system consistent with its values and principles? Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada

    Google Scholar 

  • Eigenbrode SD, O’Rourke M, Wulfhorst JD, Althoff DM, Goldberg CS, Merrill K et al (2007) Employing philosophical dialogue in collaborative science. BioScience 57(1):55–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Einsiedel EF, Ross H (2002) Animal spare parts? A Canadian public consultation on xenotransplantation. Sci Eng Ethics 8:579–591

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher E (2005) Lessons learned from the ethical, legal and social implications program (ELSI): planning societal implications research for the National Nanotechnology Program. Technol Soc 27(3):321–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher E, Mahajan RL, Mitcham C (2006) Midstream modulation of technology: governance from within. Bull Sci Technol Soc 26(6):485–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher E, O’Rourke M, Evans R, Kennedy EB, Gorman ME, Seager TP (2015) Mapping the integrative field: taking stock of socio-technical collaborations. J Respons Innov 2(1):39–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goering S (forthcoming) Thinking differently: neurodiversity and neural engineering. In: Rommelfanger K, Johnson LS (eds) Routledge handbook of neuroethics. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Have HT (2006) The activities of UNESCO in the areas of ethics. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 16(4):333–351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Illes J, Reimer J, Kwon BK (2011) Stem cell clinical trials for spinal cord injury: readiness, reluctance, redefinition. Stem Cell Rev Rep 7(4):997–1005

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Illes J, Davidson J, Matthews R (2014) Environmental neuroethics: changing the environment—changing the brain. J Law Biosci 1:221–223

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Illes J, Owen AM, Byram AC; the MCS Working Group (2016) Operationalizing neuroimaging for disorders of consciousness in the face of uncertainty and contingency: a view for the Canadian landscape. Can J Neurol Sci 1–3

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff S (2011) Constitutional moments in governing science and technology. Sci Eng Ethics 17(4):621–638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen CB (2005) Citizen projects and consensus-building at the Danish Board of Technology. Acta Sociol 48(3):221–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juengst ET (1991) The human genome project and bioethics. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 1(1):71–74

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschen MP, Topjian AA, Abend NS, Illes J (2014) Neuroprognostication after pediatric cardiac arrest. Pediatr Neurol 51(5):663–668

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein E (2015) Informed consent in implantable BCI research: identifying risks and exploring meaning. Sci Eng Ethics 22(5):1299–1317

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Klein E, Ojemann J (2016) Informed consent in implantable BCI research: identification of research risks and recommendations for development of best practices. J Neural Eng 13(4):043001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Klein E, Brown T, Sample M, Truitt AR, Goering S (2015) Engineering the brain: ethical issues and the introduction of neural devices. Hast Cent Rep 45(6):26–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein E, Goering S, Gagne J, Shea CV, Franklin R, Zorowitz S et al (2016) Brain-computer interface-based control of closed-loop brain stimulation: attitudes and ethical considerations. Brain Comput Interfaces 3(3):140–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Leroux T, Hirtle M, Fortin LN (1998) An overview of public consultation mechanisms developed to address the ethical and social issues raised by biotechnology. J Consum Policy 21:445–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leshner AI (2003) Public engagement with science. Science 299:977

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Longstaff J, Krahmova V, Portalis E, Illes J (2015) Sharing with more caring: coordinating and improving the ethical governance of data and biomaterials obtained from children. PLoS One 10(7):e0130527

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Macnaghten P, Kearnes M, Wynne B (2005) Nanotechnology, governance, and public deliberation: what role for the social sciences? Sci Commun 27(2):1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mascalzoni D, Dove ES, Rubinstein Y, Dawkins HJ, Kole A, McCormack P et al (2016) International Charter of principles for sharing bio-specimens and data. Eur J Hum Genet 24(7):1096

    Google Scholar 

  • McCain L (2002) Informing technology policy decisions: the US human genome Project’s ethical, legal, and social implications programs as a critical case. Technol Soc 24(1):111–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McEwen JE, Boyer JT, Sun KY, Rothenberg KH, Lockhart NC, Guyer MS (2014) The ethical, legal, and social implications program of the National Human Genome Research Institute: reflections on an ongoing experiment*. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet 15(1):481–505

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moses T, Illes J (2017) Ethics, ethicists, and professional organizations in the neurological sciences. Am J Bioeth Neurosci 8(1):3–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Nature (2004) Editorial: going public. Nature 431:833

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Doherty K, Hawkins A (2010) Structuring public engagement for effective input in policy development on human tissue biobanking. Public Health Genomics 13(4):197–206

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • O’Rourke M, Crowley SJ (2013) Philosophical intervention and cross-disciplinary science: the story of the toolbox project. Synthese 190(11):1937–1954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page A, Baker D, Bobrow M, Boycott K, Burn J, Chanock S et al (2016) Genomics. A federated ecosystem for sharing genomic, clinical data. Global Alliance for Genomics and Health. Science 352(6291):1278–1280

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabinow P (2009) Prosperity, amelioration, flourishing: from a logic of practical judgment to reconstruction. Law Lit 21(3):301–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabinow P, Bennett G (2012) Designing human practices: an experiment with synthetic biology. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Robillard JM (2016) The online environment: a key variable in the ethical response to complementary and alternative medicine for Alzheimer disease. J Alzheimer Dis 51(1):11–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robillard JM, Illes J, Arcand M, Beattie BL, Hayden S, Lawrence P et al (2015) Scientific validity and ethics of online tests for Alzheimer disease. Alzheimers Dement (Amst) 1(3):281–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson B, Vasko SE, Gonnerman C, Christen M, O’Rourke M, Fosl PS (2016) Human values and the value of humanities in interdisciplinary research. Cogent Arts Humanit 3(1):1123080

    Google Scholar 

  • Roskies A (2016) Neuroethics. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2016 Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/neuroethics/

  • Schnapp LM, Rotschy L, Hall TE, Crowley S, O’Rourke M (2012) How to talk to strangers: facilitating knowledge sharing within translational health teams with the Toolbox dialogue method. Transl Behav Med 2(4):469–479

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharp RR, Taylor HA, Brinich MA, Boyle MM, Cho M, Coors M et al (2015) Research ethics consultation: ethical and professional practice challenges and recommendations. Acad Med 90(5):615–620

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Specker Sullivan L, Illes J (2016) Beyond communication and control: towards ethically complete rationales for brain-computer interface research. Brain Comput Interfaces 3(3):156–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Specker Sullivan L, Klein E, Brown T, Sample M, Pham M, Tubig P et al (under review) Keeping disability in mind: a case study in implantable brain-computer interface research

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein DJ, Illes J (2015) Beyond scientism and skepticism: an integrative approach to global mental health. Front Psychiatry 6:166

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson S, Beattie BL, Vedan R, Dwosh E, Bruce L, Illes J (2013) Neuroethics, confidentiality, and a cultural imperative in imperative in early onset Alzheimer disease: a case study with a First Nation population. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 8(15):1–6

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner L (2003) The tyranny of ‘genethics’. Nat Biotechnol 21(11):1282–1282

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Est R (2011) The broad challenge of public engagement in science: commentary on: “constitutional moments in governing science and technology”. Sci Eng Ethics 17(4):639–648

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

JI is Canada Research Chair in Neuroethics and President of the International Neuroethics Society. Her work and the National Core for Neuroethics have been supported by a range of government and private funders including the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the BC Knowledge Development Fund, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation, and Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute. LSS is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Center for Sensorimotor Neural Engineering, University of Washington, and at the National Core for Neuroethics. This work is supported by the National Science Foundation, Award Number EEC-1028725. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Core for Neuroethics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Laura Specker Sullivan & Judy Illes

  2. Center for Sensorimotor Neural Engineering, University of Washington, Box 37, 1414 NE 42nd Street Suite 204, 98105-6271, Seattle, WA, USA

    Laura Specker Sullivan

  3. Department of Philosophy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Laura Specker Sullivan

Authors
  1. Laura Specker Sullivan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Judy Illes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura Specker Sullivan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. IRCM, Université de Montréal, and McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada

    Eric Racine

  2. IRCM and McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada

    John Aspler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sullivan, L.S., Illes, J. (2017). Models of Engagement in Neuroethics Programs: Past, Present, and Future. In: Racine, E., Aspler, J. (eds) Debates About Neuroethics. Advances in Neuroethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54651-3_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54651-3_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-54650-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-54651-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation