This article asks whether the benefits of neuroelectronic devices that restore function outweigh their risks to the individual and society and whether we should move beyond therapy to enhance our capabilities by the use of such devices?
David Elkin, MD, Erick Hung, MD, and Gilbert Villela, MD
The rapidly evolving field of neuroethics is concerned with the ethical questions that new technologies will pose about autonomy, privacy, the definition of normal, and individuality.
This month, AMA Journal of Ethics theme editor Jacquelyn Nestor, a fifth-year MD/PhD student at Hofstra-Northwell School of Medicine, interviewed Allen Buchanan, PhD, about how we can safely explore cutting-edge biomedical enhancements.
Concerns about the deleterious effects of stress on the mind and body have led to the beginnings of a stress vaccine, an injection that will reduce these effects.
Within the patient-physician relationship, the request for neuroenhancement becomes a chief concern, and the physician has a duty to take a history and perform a physical exam to determine whether the patient’s current level of function represents significant change.
Art therapy helps trafficking survivors deal with trauma, but anti-trafficking advocates who exhibit survivors’ artwork must guard against re-exploitation.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(1):98-106. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.1.imhl1-1701.