Ethics of neuroscience debate Flashcards
Understanding consciousness
If we can locate the consciousness does that mean those in a persistent vegetative state should have life support withdrawn?
Do we have the moral right to withdraw care?
Crick and Koch (1998)
Proposes that the claustrum is the seat of consciousness.
Understanding consciousness - ETHICAL
This knowledge could help us make decisions about patients who are in a persistent vegetative state. The decision to end their life could be based on the knowledge of whether they remain conscious or not.
Koubeissi et al (2014)
A 54-year-old woman suffered from severe epilepsy.
During some tests of her brain, an electrode placed near the claustrum was electrically stimulated.
The woman stopped reading, stared blankly and didn’t respond to visual or auditory commands.
When the stimulation stopped, she immediately regained consciousness with no recollection of the event.
Understanding consciousness - NOT ETHICAL
These findings may be unethical as it creates the difficulty of deciding if we have the moral right to withdraw care.
The findings are derived from a study of one individual and can therefore not be generalised and need to be treated with caution.
Treating criminal behaviour
Part of the role of any criminal justice system is to rehabilitate offenders to prevent further criminal behaviour.
Some people believe that criminal behaviour stems from abnormal levels of certain neurotransmitters.
If this is true, then drugs could be used to “treat” criminals.
Cherek et al (2002)
Investigated the levels of impulsivity and aggression in males with a history of conduct disorder and criminal behaviour.
Half received a placebo for 21 days.
The other half were administered paroxetine (an SSRI antidepressant).
Those who received paroxetine showed a significant decrease in impulsive responses and aggression declined by the end of the study.
Treating criminal behaviour - ETHICAL
Offering pharmacological treatments to criminals could reduce recidivism and make society safer.
A court may offer a convicted criminal the choice of a prison term or a course of medication.
Martha Farah (2004)
Argues that, if courts use neurological interventions, it signals the denial of an individual’s freedom.
This is something that even prisoners haven’t been denied previously.
Treating criminal behaviour - NOT ETHICAL
Although neuroscientists may link criminal behaviours to neurological imbalances, many see crime as a response to the social context.
Even if there is a neurological basis to criminal behaviour, there is the question about whether it’s acceptable to include mandatory neurological interventions for prisoners.
Implications
Neuroscientists who help treat or even cure these disorders could save the UK economy billions of pounds.
Neuroscientists have a responsibility to ensure the societies in which they work are informed and aware of the implications of their work.
Nuffield Trust (2014)
Since the financial crisis in 2008, there has been an increase in the amount of antidepressants being prescribed.
The trust also noted a greater rise in antidepressant usage amongst areas of the population with higher rates of employment.
Thomas and Morris (2003)
Estimated that the total cost of depression in adults in England alone was £9.1 billion in 2000.
Alzheimer’s Research UK
The cost to the UK economy of treating dementia is £23 billion per year.
Conclusion
Neuroscientists aren’t solely responsible for the way their research is used but it’s also the responsibility of governments, regulatory bodies and other institutions in society to ensure that neuroscientific knowledge is applied in an appropriate ethical way.
