Thinking Ahead on Deep Brain Stimulation: An Analysis of the Ethical Implications of a Developing Technology (original) (raw)
Related papers
Ethical Issues in Deep Brain Stimulation
Frontiers in integrative neuroscience, 2011
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is currently used to treat neurological disorders like Parkinson's disease, essential tremor, and dystonia, and is explored as an experimental treatment for psychiatric disorders like major depression and obsessive compulsive disorder. This mini review discusses ethical issues in DBS treatment and research, as they have been discussed in the medical and ethical literature. With regard to DBS treatment, the most important issues are balancing risks and benefits and ensuring respect for the autonomous wish of the patient. This implies special attention to patient selection, psycho-social impact of treatment, effects on personal identity, and treatment of children. Moreover, it implies a careful informed consent process in which unrealistic expectations of patients and their families are addressed and in which special attention is given to competence. In the context of research, the fundamental ethical challenge is to promote high-quality scientific research in the interest of future patients, while at the same time safeguarding the rights and interests of vulnerable research subjects. Several guidelines have been proposed to ensure this. One of the preconditions to further development of responsible and transparent research practices is the establishment of a comprehensive registry.
Ethical Focal Points in the International Practice of Deep Brain Stimulation
AJOB Neuroscience, 2014
Werner Bothe, Universit€ atsklinikum M€ unster Sabine M € uller, Charit e-Universit€ atsmedizin Berlin Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a standard therapy for several movement disorders, and the list of further indications that are investigated is growing rapidly. We performed two surveys among DBS experts (n 1 D 113) and centers (n 2 D 135) to identify ethical focal points in the current global practice of DBS. The data indicate a mismatch between the patients' fears and the frequencies of the suspected side effects, a significant "satisfaction gap," signs of improvements of outcome, habituation effects in terms of involved disciplines, a growing spectrum of novel indications that partly conflicts with the experts' success probability ratings, and differences in the density of supply between countries that might affect the future development of DBS. We formulate ethical recommendations with regard both to patient-related practices (e.g., recruitment, assurance of alternatives) and to institutional development (e.g., measures for quality assurance and for the development of novel DBS indications).
The Neuroethics of Intracerebral Stem Cell Transplantation and Deep Brain Stimulation, transcript Press, Bielefeld, Germany, 2000
The thought-provoking concept of 'Implanted Minds' can be addressed from quite different interdisciplinary perspectives, such as from the clinical and basic scientific fields, from biomedical ethics and the philosophy of mind and brain science. In focusing here on some of the early research trajectories of Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) since the 1903s, the current chapter adds another view to the discussion and puts forward a history of medicine and neuroscience perspective regarding the ethical problems involved.
Brain Topography, 2013
In recent years, non-pharmacologic approaches to modifying human neural activity have gained increasing attention. One of these approaches is brain stimulation, which involves either the direct application of electrical current to structures in the nervous system or the indirect application of current by means of electromagnetic induction. Interventions that manipulate the brain have generally been regarded as having both the potential to alleviate devastating brain-related conditions and the capacity to create unforeseen and unwanted consequences. Hence, although brain stimulation techniques offer considerable benefits to society, they also raise a number of ethical concerns. In this paper we will address various dilemmas related to brain stimulation in the context of clinical practice and biomedical research. We will survey current work involving deep brain stimulation (DBS), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). We will reflect upon relevant similarities and differences between them, and consider some potentially problematic issues that may arise within the framework of established principles of medical ethics: nonmaleficence and beneficence, autonomy, and justice.
Researchers’ Ethical Concerns About Using Adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation for Enhancement
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
The capacity of next-generation closed-loop or adaptive deep brain stimulation devices (aDBS) to read (measure neural activity) and write (stimulate brain regions or circuits) shows great potential to effectively manage movement, seizure, and psychiatric disorders, and also raises the possibility of using aDBS to electively (non-therapeutically) modulate mood, cognition, and prosociality. What separates aDBS from most neurotechnologies (e.g. transcranial stimulation) currently used for enhancement is that aDBS remains an invasive, surgically-implanted technology with a risk-benefit ratio significantly different when applied to diseased versus non-diseased individuals. Despite a large discourse about the ethics of enhancement, no empirical studies yet examine perspectives on enhancement from within the aDBS research community. We interviewed 23 aDBS researchers about their attitudes toward expanding aDBS use for enhancement. A thematic content analysis revealed that researchers share...
Clinical and ethical aspects of modulating behaviour and affect through Deep Brain Stimulation
2016
I'm pleased to present this cumulative dissertation on clinical and ethical aspects of studying behaviour in disorders that have been treated with deep brain stimulation. This work bridges disciplines of (clinical) neurobiology, (moral) psychology and ethics. My interest in the neurobiological underpinnings of behaviour has been a loyal companion since I conducted ethological experiments in preclinical psychiatric research during my time as a master student. Based on my early interest in philosophy reaching to the beginning of my studies as a biologist, I felt the urge to explore the realm of intentions by leaving behind the mechanistic realm of operant conditioning. Hence, the temptation of understanding behaviour and how ethics informs and reflects on neurobehavioural research was present ever since. In essence, the central topic is one of neuroethics that is dedicated to interlocking the excitement of advances in basic and clinical neuroscience with human values and the diversity of our societies. In addition, I always felt the importance of actively evaluating research through an ethics lens and probably today more than ever before. This cumulative dissertation has been a collaborative and international effort. My gratitude goes to all who have supported me during my research in the last years: I thank Prof. Nikola Biller-Andorno of the
Journal of Medical Ethics, 2020
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been regarded as an efficient and safe treatment for Parkinson’s disease (PD) since being approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1997. It is estimated that more than 150 000 patients have been implanted, with a forecasted rapid increase in uptake with population ageing. Recent longitudinal follow-up studies have reported a significant increase in postoperative survival rates of patients with PD implanted with DBS as compared with those not implanted with DBS. Although DBS tends to increase life expectancy for most patients with PD, this medical benefit does not come without attendant negative consequences. For example, emerging forms of iatrogenic harms are sometimes induced harms which were not initially expected when clinicians proposed neurosurgery and patients or their guardians consented to the treatment. We report and discuss the clinical case of a patient who was implanted with DBS more than 20 years ago (at the time of writing) and is now experiencing unexpected stages of PD. This case illustrates how extending the life span without improving quality of life may introduce a burden of harms for patients and families. As well, this case shows why we should prepare for the expanding numbers of PD-implanted patients experiencing a gain of longevity but with severe stages of disease leading to diminution in quality of life. This newly observed effect of DBS treatment requires us to explore ethical questions related to iatrogenic harms, informed consent, end of life and caregivers’ burden.
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 2011
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is optimistically portrayed in contemporary media. This already happened with psychosurgery during the first half of the twentieth century. The tendency of popular media to hype the benefits of DBS therapies, without equally highlighting risks, fosters public expectations also due to the lack of ethical analysis in the scientific literature. Media are not expected (and often not prepared) to raise the ethical issues which remain unaddressed by the scientific community. To obtain a more objective portrayal of DBS in the media, a deeper collaboration between the science community and journalists, and particularly specialized ones, must be promoted. Access to databases and articles, directly or through science media centers, has also been proven effective in increasing the quality of reporting. This article has three main objectives. Firstly, to explore the past media coverage of leukotomy, and to examine its widespread acceptance and the neglect of ethical issues in its depiction. Secondly, to describe how current enthusiastic coverage of DBS causes excessive optimism and neglect of ethical issues in patients. Thirdly, to discuss communication models and strategies to enhance media and science responsibility.
Neurosurgery, 2016
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) for psychiatric disorders needs to be investigated in proper research trials. However, there are rare circumstances in which DBS could be offered to psychiatric patients as a form of surgical innovation, therefore potentially blurring the lines between these research trials and health care. In this article, we discuss the conditions under which surgical innovation may be accepted as a practice falling at the frontiers of standard clinical care and research per se. However, recognizing this distinction does not settle all ethical issues. Our article offers ethical guideposts to allow clinicians, surgical teams, institutions, and international review boards to deliberate about some of the fundamental issues that should be considered before surgical innovation with psychiatric DBS is undertaken. We provide key guiding questions to sustain this deliberation. Then we review the normative and empirical literature that exists to guide reflection about the ethic...
Biotechnology journal, 2008
Within the recent development of brain-machine-interfaces deep brain stimulation (DBS) has become one of the most promising approaches for neuromodulation. After its introduction more than 20 years ago, it has in clinical routine become a successful tool for treating neurological disorders like Parkinson's disease, essential tremor and dystonia. Recent evidence also demonstrates efficacy in improving emotional and cognitive processing in obsessive-compulsive disorder and major depression, thus allowing new treatment options for treatment refractory psychiatric diseases, and even indicating future potential to enhance functioning in healthy subjects. We demonstrate here that DBS is neither intrinsically unethical for psychiatric indications nor for enhancement purposes. To gain normative orientation, the concept of "personality" is not useful--even if a naturalistic notion is employed. As an alternative, the common and widely accepted bioethical criteria of beneficence, non-maleficence, and autonomy allow a clinically applicable, highly differentiated context- and case-sensitive approach. Based on these criteria, an ethical analysis of empirical evidence from both DBS in movement disorders and DBS in psychiatric disease reveals that wide-spread use of DBS for psychiatric indications is currently not legitimated and that the basis for enhancement purposes is even more questionable. Nevertheless, both applications might serve as ethically legitimate, promising purposes in the future.