Neuroethics & Law Blog

Moderated Comments

Due to a spike in spam comments, I've changed the blog settings so that comments will not post until I approve them.  (My current plan is to screen comments solely for their spam-like nature not to otherwise approve the quality or content of comments.  To reduce the chances that your comments are accidentally screened out, be sure that the name you give when commenting doesn't sound like an advertisement for a product or service. )

PEBS Neuroethics Roundup from JHU Guest Blogger

Last Edition's Most Popular Article: Briefing: New law claims a fetus can feel pain, New Scientist In the Popular Press: Chimps ‘ feel death like humans’, BBC News Hunter-gatherer Children Seek Food, In the Field Do You Eat Chocolate to Relieve Depression–or Does Chocolate Make You Depressed?, Discover The Conversation: Brain research brings wonders and worries, The Sacramento Bee The Neurobiology of Social Anxiety Disorder, Brain Blogger The Brain Rejects Inequality, Brain Blogger The secrets of intelligence lie within a single cell, New Scientist Brain shuts off in response to healer's prayer. New Scientist Personality May Influence Brain Shrinkage in Aging, Science Daily Psychopaths and Rational Morality, The Frontal Cortex From the Academic Literature: Not so Fast. On Some Bold Neuroscientific Claims Concerning Human Agency, Neuroethics Neuroscience: Each synapse to its own, Nature Why fairness pays, Nature Neural basis of extraordinary empathy and altruistic motivation, Neuroimage Different amygdala subregions mediate valence-related and attentional effects of oxytocin in humans, PNAS Evolution-guided discovery and recoding of allosteric pathway specificity determinants in psychoactive bioamine receptors, PNAS Imaging genetics and development: Challenges and promises, Human Brain Mapping Empathy constrained: Prejudice predicts reduced mental simulation of actions during observation of outgroups, Journal of Experimental Psychology Slitrk5 deficiency impairs corticostriatal circuitry and leads to obsessive-compulsive–like behaviors in mice, Nature Medicine Cheesecake-eating rats and the question of food addiction, Nature Neuroscience  Anxious interactions, Nature Neuroscience Just a little (lateral prefrontal) patience, Nature Neuroscience

The Program in Ethics and Brain Sciences (PEBS) is a collaborative effort of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics and the  Johns Hopkins Brain Sciences Institute . The goal of PEBS is to ensure that research in brain science proceeds with an informed understanding of ethical issues, and that philosophical and empirical analyses of the advances in brain research proceed with an informed understanding of the science.

Ethics and Informed Consent of Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) for Patients with Treatment-Resistant Depression (TRD)

From the current issue of Neuroethics:

Fabrice Jotterand^{1, 2} , Shawn M. McClintock^{1, 3}, Archie A. Alexander⁴ and Mustafa M. Husain²

(1)	Department of Clinical Sciences, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA

(2)	Department of Psychiatry, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA

(3)	Department of Psychiatry, Division of Brain Stimulation and Therapeutic Modulation, New York State Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

(4)	Independent Consultant for Health Law, Policy and Bioethics, Austin, TX, USA

Received: 1 July 2009  Accepted: 14 September 2009  Published online: 12 January 2010

Abstract  

Since the Nuremberg trials (1947–1949), informed consent has become central for ethical practice in patient care and biomedical research. Codes of ethics emanating from the Nuremberg Code (1947) recognize the importance of protecting patients and research subjects from abuses, manipulation and deception. Informed consent empowers individuals to autonomously and voluntarily accept or reject participation in either clinical treatment or research. In some cases, however, the underlying mental or physical condition of the individual may alter his or her cognitive abilities and compromise the informed consent process. This is particularly true in chronic psychiatric conditions such as Treatment-Resistant Depression (TRD), where individuals may fail to respond to traditional antidepressant treatments (e.g., psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy). Moreover, it may raise further concerns for an individual’s motivation to consent and the level of understanding of the treatment or research procedure. This paper focuses on the informed consent process for Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) in the treatment of individuals diagnosed with TRD. Specifically, the paper addresses how depression may affect the decision-making capacity of an individual and the potential ethical and legal impact of failure to appreciate the seven elements of the consenting process (competence, voluntariness, disclosure, recommendation, understanding, decision, and authorization). To ensure the protection of vulnerable individuals with psychiatric disorders such as TRD and promote ethical behavior in biomedical research and patient care while avoiding potential legal pitfalls, we propose a paradigm that requires a stringent evaluation process of decision-making capacity for informed consent.

Brain Imaging and Privacy

In the current issue of Neuroethics:

Juha Räikkä¹ 

(1)	Department of Philosophy, University of Turku, 20014 Turku, Finland

Received: 14 October 2009  Accepted: 19 January 2010  Published online: 2 February 2010

Abstract  

I will argue that the fairly common assumption that brain imaging may compromise people’s privacy in an undesirable way only if moral crimes are committed is false. Sometimes persons’ privacy is compromised because of failures of privacy. A normal emotional reaction to failures of privacy is embarrassment and shame, not moral resentment like in the cases of violations of right to privacy. I will claim that if (1) neuroimaging will provide all kinds of information about persons’ inner life and not only information that is intentionally searched for, and (2) there will be more and more application fields of fMRI and more and more people whose brains will be scanned (without any coercion), then, in the future, shame may be an unfortunately common feeling in our culture. This is because failures of privacy may dramatically increase. A person may feel shame strongly and long, especially if his failure is witnessed by people who he considers relatively important, but less than perfectly trustworthy.

Cognitive Enhancement, Lifestyle Choice or Misuse of Prescription Drugs?

Published in the current issue of Neuroethics:

Eric Racine^{1, 2, 3}  and Cynthia Forlini^{1, 2}

(1)	Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montreal, Canada

(2)	Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada

(3)	McGill University, Montreal, Canada

Received: 16 July 2008  Accepted: 31 July 2008  Published online: 4 September 2008

Abstract  

The prospects of enhancing cognitive or motor functions using neuroscience in otherwise healthy individuals has attracted considerable attention and interest in neuroethics (Farah et al., Nature Reviews Neuroscience 5:421–425, 2004; Glannon Journal of Medical Ethics 32:74–78, 2006). The use of stimulants is one of the areas which has propelled the discussion on the potential for neuroscience to yield cognition-enhancing products. However, we have found in our review of the literature that the paradigms used to discuss the non-medical use of stimulant drugs prescribed for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) vary considerably. In this brief communication, we identify three common paradigms—prescription drug abuse, cognitive enhancement, and lifestyle use of pharmaceuticals—and briefly highlight how divergences between paradigms create important “ethics blind spots”.

"Realism, Punishment & Reform"

Recently posted to SSRN:

"Realism, Punishment & Reform" 

University of Chicago Law Review, Forthcoming

PAUL H. ROBINSON, University of Pennsylvania Law School
ROBERT KURZBAN, University of Pennsylvania - Department of Psychology
OWEN D. JONES, Vanderbilt University - School of Law & Department of Biological Sciences

Professors Donald Braman, Dan Kahan, and David Hoffman, in their article "Some Realism About Punishment Naturalism," to be published in an upcoming issue of the University of Chicago Law Review, critique a series of our articles: Concordance and Conflict in Intuitions of Justice (http://ssrn.com/abstract=932067), The Origins of Shared Intuitions of Justice (http://ssrn.com/abstract=952726), and Intuitions of Justice: Implications for Criminal Law and Justice Policy (http://ssrn.com/abstract=976026). Our reply, here, follows their article in that coming issue.

As we demonstrate, they have misunderstood our views on, and thus the implications of, widespread agreement about punishing the "core" of wrongdoing. Although much of their attack is therefore misplaced, important disagreements may remain concerning: whether there is a meaningful difference between core and non-core cases; whether judgments about core cases are less malleable than judgments about non-core cases; and whether imposing punishments perceived to be unjust imposes, in turn, significant costs on the criminal justice system. Which of the disputed views is correct can have important implications for the administration of criminal justice. Far from being anti-reformists, as accused, we argue that Reform Realism is the most effective path to bringing about needed reforms.

PEBS Neuroethics Roundup from JHU Guest Blogger

Last Edition's Most Popular Article: Hallucinogens Have Doctors Tuning In Again, NY Times In the Popular Press: Ultrathin Silk-Based Electronics Make Better Brain Implants, Wired Science  Apes found suffering self-doubt, New Scientist Brewing up identity with Billy Bragg, Nature News Arguing about moral responsibility, Practical Ethics  Robots with skin enter our touchy-feely world, New Scientist  Briefing: New law claims a fetus can feel pain, New Scientist Empathetic mirror neurons found in humans at last, New Scientist April 16 2010 From the Academic Literature: New Guidelines Aim to Improve Studies of Traumatic Brain Injury, Science  Dissolvable films of silk fibroin for ultrathin conformal bio-integrated electronics, Nature Materials Deontological and altruistic guilt: Evidence for distinct neurobiological substrates, Human Brain Mapping Reward and motivation systems: A brain mapping study of early-stage intense romantic love in Chinese participants, Human Brain Mapping  Grammar improvement following deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic and the pedunculopontine nuclei in advanced Parkinson's disease: A pilot study, Parkinsonism & Related Disorders  Long-term effects of bilateral deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus on depression in patients with Parkinson’s disease, Parkinsonism & Related Disorders

"The Criminal Liability of Artificial Intelligence Entities"

Recently posted to SSRN:

"The Criminal Liability of Artificial Intelligence Entities" 

GABRIEL HALLEVY, Ono Academic College, Faculty of Law
In 1981, a 37-year-old Japanese employee of a motorcycle factory was killed by an artificial-intelligence robot working near him. The robot erroneously identified the employee as a threat to its mission, and calculated that the most efficient way to eliminate this threat was by pushing him into an adjacent operating machine. Using its very powerful hydraulic arm, the robot smashed the surprised worker into the operating machine, killing him instantly, and then resumed its duties with no one to interfere with its mission. Unfortunately, this is not science fiction, and the legal question is: Who is to be held liable for this killing?

PEBS Neuroethics Roundup from JHU Guest Blogger

Last Edition's Most Popular Article: Can Animals Be Gay? NY Times In the Popular Press: Hallucinogens Have Doctors Tuning In Again, NY Times Children who form no racial stereotypes found, Nature News Chimps reject unfairness to their fellows, New Scientist Neuroethics and the President's New Commission, Neuroethics & Law Blog Mapping the Fly Brain, Neuron by Neuron, Wired Science Copycats Prevail in Computer Survival Game, Wired Science Bionic Eye in Sight: Wide-View Neurostimulator Concept Unveiled, Science Daily Empathy and Violence Have Similar Circuits in the Brain, Research Suggests, Science Daily Simple Test Can Detect Signs of Suicidal Thoughts in People Taking Antidepressants, Science Daily Magnets make morals moot? Neuroethics at the Core Blog The Depiction of Addiction, Neuroethics at the Core Blog Memristors Getting Closer to Ultra-Fast, Brain-Like Computing, Says HP, Discover Magazine Blog Mirror Neurons Join Marilyn Monroe Neurons and Halle Berry Neurons in the Human Hippocampus, The Neurocritic Blog AAN: Smarter mice, Nature In the Field Blog Violence and Empathy: Brain Bedfellows, The Center for Law and the Biosciences Blog From the Academic Literature: An fMRI study of self-reflection about body image: Sex differences, Personality and Individual Differences Cosmetic Neurology: Slipping Down the Slippery Slope,Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics Brain functional changes (QEEG cordance) and worsening suicidal ideation and mood symptoms during antidepressant treatment, Acta Psychiatric Scandinavica Why Copy Others? Insights from the Social Learning Strategies Tournament, Science Did Working Memory Spark Creative Culture? Science Sustained experience of emotion after loss of memory in patients with amnesia, PNAS A meeting of minds, Nature Medicine Single-Neuron Responses in Humans during Execution and Observation of Actions, Current Biology

The Program in Ethics and Brain Sciences (PEBS) is a collaborative effort of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics and the  Johns Hopkins Brain Sciences Institute . The goal of PEBS is to ensure that research in brain science proceeds with an informed understanding of ethical issues, and that philosophical and empirical analyses of the advances in brain research proceed with an informed understanding of the science.

Felicity Grisham on "The Problem of the Continuum"

Felicity Grisham is a recent Stanford graduate (who focused on neuropsychology) and will soon head off to law school.  She has some thoughts on law and neuroscience (that overlap with mine in certain respects).  Here is her post, entitled "The Problem of the Continuum," after the jump.

Fractional Parenthood In Humans Is Here

Less than three months ago, I was quoted in the New York Times about the possibility of having fractional biological parents.  Research in non-human primates showed how it was possible to create a child with genetic material from one father and two mothers.  While splitting up "legal" parenthood into many parts is nothing new, having more than two genetic parents (what I call "fractional parents") is. 

And now, it appears, researchers have created a human embryo with three genetic parents (chromosomal DNA from one father, chromosomal DNA from one mother, and mitochondrial DNA from a different mother).  Assuming the embryo could be brought to term, the approach could enable women with damaged mitochondrial DNA to still become (fractional) biological parents.  To be sure, the third parent's mitochondrial DNA would have just a tiny role in the child's total genetic profile.  But biological parenthood could become even more diffuse in the future.  Such developments raise interesting moral and legal questions about the nature of parenthood that I discuss here.

Gabel on Forensiphilia

Jessica D. Gabel (Law, Georgia State) has posted Forensiphilia: Is the Public Fascination with Forensic Science a Love Affair or a Fatal Attraction? on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

In February of 2009, the National Academy of Sciences released its much anticipated diagnosis and prescription for what ails the forensic science community. The Report confirmed the low but steady noise that had been building in the criminal justice system for at least a decade: that, with the exception of DNA evidence, much of what is presented as forensic science is not really science at all. Instead, a large segment of the high-tech pageantry seen on television and now expected and employed in court would fail to clear even the lowest hurdles of stringent scientific inquiry. Nonetheless, forensic evidence is often used to demonstrate the certainty of a person’s guilt by authoritatively “matching” evidence from the crime scene or victim to the suspect. The Report sounded the alarm as to the needs of the forensic science community, raised critical concerns, and even suggested a remedy by calling for the creation of an independent agency to regulate the field of forensic science. Moreover, it came at a time of “forensiphilia” – where forensic science is itself a celebrity that captivates and enchants audiences. One year after the Report caused ripples throughout scientific and legal circles, it seems as though, in some ways, the shock has passed, numbness has set in, and progress is idle. This article will examine the evolution of forensic science on television and in the courtroom. It will evaluate whether DNA is the reliable anomaly among the forensic science disciplines. Finally, along a similar vein to the Report’s resolution to strengthen forensic science, this article will call for a strengthening in legal education aimed at fostering both an understanding of the advances in science and a skepticism towards methods that inherently lack a solid foundation in science.

What People Think About During Academic Talks

I highly recommend this post at the X-Phi blog on what goes through people's heads during academic philosophy talks.  One can bet the results would be similar at other academic talks and in lots of classrooms.  (That's not to say that the methodology is flawless, but it is interesting nonetheless.)

PEBS Neuroethics Roundup from JHU Guest Blogger

Last Edition's Most Popular Article Neuroscientists don't believe in souls--But that doesn't mean they can't sell theirs Scientific American March 24 2010 In the Academic Literature: Bioethics Conferences 2010: Bioprediction Washington DC May 8-9. Register here  Memory sticks Nature 2010:464:948 The Inner Workings of the Chimpanzee Brain Science 2010:328(5974):40-41  Synchrony of Thalamocortical Inputs Maximizes Cortical Reliability Science 2010:328(5974):206-109 Neuronal synchrony reveals working memory networks and predicts individual memory capacity PNAS April 5 2010 Persistent schema-dependent hippocampal-neocortical connectivity during memory encoding and postencoding rest in humans PNAS April 5 2010 Changes of emotional prosody in Parkinson's disease Journal of the Neurological Sciences 2010:289(1-2):32-35 Non-motor functions in parkinsonian patients implanted in the pedunculopontine nucleus: Focus on sleep and cognitive domains Journal of the Neurological Sciences 2010:289(1-2):44-48 Assessment of the effects of subthalamic stimulation in Parkinson disease patients by artificial neural network Engineering in Medicine and Biological Society 2009:3-6:5673-5676 Law & Psychiatry: Genetic Discrimination in Mental Disorders: The Impact of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act Psychiatric Services 2010:61:338-341 In the Popular Press: Can Animals Be Gay? The New York Times Marc 29 2010 Seeking Emotional Clues Without Facial Cues The New York Times April 5 2010 From a Songbird, New Insights Into the Brain The New York Times April 5 2010 How to build ethical understanding into pilotless war planes The Economist March 31 2010 Are 'smart drugs' safe for students? Guardian April 6 2010 Newsroom: Scientists Successfully Teach Gorilla It Will Die Someday The Onion (Belated April Fool's!) Carbon dioxide may explain 'near death experiences' Science Daily April 7 2010

The Program in Ethics and Brain Sciences (PEBS) is a collaborative effort of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics and the  Johns Hopkins Brain Sciences Institute . The goal of PEBS is to ensure that research in brain science proceeds with an informed understanding of ethical issues, and that philosophical and empirical analyses of the advances in brain research proceed with an informed understanding of the science.

Neuroethics and the President's New Commission

President Obama has announced his intent to nominate new members to his Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (who will join the previously announced chair, Amy Gutmann).  The members-to-be are:

Lonnie Ali

Anita L. Allen

Barbara Atkinson

Nita A. Farahany

Alexander G. Garza

Christine Grady

Stephen L. Hauser

Raju Kucherlapati

Nelson Michael

Daniel Sulmasy

Those of you in the legal academy will recognize Anita Allen at the University of Pennsylvania (who works on issues of privacy, surveillance, memory, and more) and Nita Farahany at Vanderbilt University (who works on neurolaw, neuroethics, behavioral genetics, and more and has been frequently mentioned on this blog).  I send my congratulations to them both!

The commission has a good number of people who do neuroscience-related work.  In addition, the commission's charter states: "In support of its mission, the Commission may examine issues linked to specific technologies, including but not limited to . . . the application of neuro and robotic sciences."  So it will be interesting to see how its work develops.  George W. Bush's President's Council on Bioethics paid a good bit of attention to neuroethics issues, and it seems like the Obama incarnation may do the same.

The phrase "Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues" is a mouthful.   The initials "PCSBI" don't help much.  Maybe someday, there will be a uniform name from President to President that will have a convenient shorthand.  In the meantime, Summer Johnson suggests "pucks-bee," (though I might have gone with "picks-bee").