In the debate on the ethics of the non-medical use of pharmaceuticals for cognitive performance enhancement in healthy individuals there is a clear division between those who view “cognitive enhancement” as ethically unproblematic and those who see such practices as fraught with ethical problems. Yet another, more subtle issue, relates to the relevance and quality of the contribution of scholarly bioethics to this debate. More specifically, how have various forms of speculation, anticipatory ethics, and methods to predict scientific trends and (...) societal responses augmented or diminished this contribution? In this paper, we use the discussion of the ethics of cognitive enhancement to explore the positive and negative contribution of speculation in bioethics scholarship. First, we review and discuss how speculation has relied on different sets of assumptions regarding the non-medical use of stimulants, namely: terminology and framing; scientific aspects such as efficacy and safety; estimates of prevalence and consequent normalization; and the need for normative reflection and regulatory guidelines. Second, three methodological guideposts are proposed to alleviate some of the pitfalls of speculation: acknowledge assumptions more explicitly and identify the value attributed to assumptions; validate assumptions with interdisciplinary literature; and adopt a broad perspective to promote more comprehensive reflection. We conclude that, through the examination of the controversy about cognitive enhancement, we can employ these methodological guideposts to enhance the value of contributions from bioethics and minimize potential epistemic and practical pitfalls in this case and perhaps in other areas of bioethical debate. (shrink)

Neuroscientific research on the removal of unpleasant and traumatic memories is still at a very early stage, but is making rapid progress and has stirred a significant philosophical and neuroethical debate. Even if memory is considered to be a fundamental element of personal identity, in the context of memory-erasing the autonomy of decision-making seems prevailing. However, there seem to be situations where the overall context in which people might choose to intervene on their memories would lead to view those actions (...) as counterproductive. In this article, I outline situations where the so-called composition effects can produce negative results for everyone involved, even if the individual decisions are not as such negative. In such situations medical treatments that usually everyone should be free to take, following the principle of autonomy, can make it so that the personal autonomy of the individuals in the group considered is damaged or even destroyed. In these specific cases, in which what is called the “conformity to context” prevails, the moral admissibility of procedures of memory-erasing is called into question and the principle of personal autonomy turns out to be subordinate to social interests benefitting every member of the group. (shrink)

We like to think we own our memories: if technology someday enables us to alter our memories, we should have certain rights to do so. But our freedom of memory has limits. Some memories are simply too valuable to society to allow individuals the unfettered right to change them. Suppose a patient regains consciousness in the middle of surgery. While traumatized by the experience and incapable of speaking, he coincidentally overhears two surgeons make plans to set fire to the hospital. (...) Assuming there is no way to erase his traumatic memories of intraoperative awareness and still prosecute the surgeons, a patient may well have a moral duty to retain the memories for the greater good. And if the patient has such a moral duty, I argue in this brief comment, then the state plausibly has the right to limit our abilities to erase memories when necessary to protect public safety or prosecute offenders. (shrink)

Die Posttraumatische Belastungsstörung (PTBS) ist ein schwerwiegendes psychisches Krankheitsbild, das Betroffene nach dem Erleben traumatisierender Situationen entwickeln. Im Zusammenhang mit den Auslandseinsätzen der Bundeswehr ist die PTBS bei Soldaten in den letzten Jahren verstärkt in den Fokus der deutschen Öffentlichkeit gerückt. Auch zivile Traumata bergen ein großes PTBS-Risiko. Seit einigen Jahren werden Methoden zur medikamentösen Prävention der PTBS erforscht. Die beiden wichtigsten Ansätze, die Prävention mit zentralnervös wirkenden Betablockern und Glukokortikoiden, basieren auf der Idee, durch den Eingriff in neuroendokrine Stressachsen (...) Einfluss auf die Art und Weise zu nehmen, in der die Erinnerung im Gedächtnis konsolidiert wird. Durch eine Entemotionalisierung und Abschwächung entsprechender Gedächtnisspuren soll das spätere Auftreten einer PTBS verhindert werden. Beide Ansätze zeigen in Pilotstudien vielversprechende Ergebnisse. Angesichts der herausragenden Bedeutung des Gedächtnisses für Individuum und Gesellschaft sollten Ansätze zur medikamentösen Gedächtnismodifikation (MGM) unter neuroethischen Gesichtspunkten diskutiert und bewertet werden. Der Text beleuchtet die MGM zur PTBS-Prävention entlang von fünf Problemachsen: 1) der Einflussnahme von MGM auf den Prozess der normalen psychischen Verarbeitung traumatischer Erlebnisse, 2) der Gefahr einer Entkopplung von Erinnerung und Realität, 3) der Bedeutung von emotionaler Erinnerung für die Moral, 4) der sozialen, juristischen und historischen Relevanz einer wahrhaftigen Erinnerungskultur und 5) der potenziellen Förderung eines gesellschaftlichen Medikalisierungsprozesses. Trotz ernsthaft zu diskutierender ethischer Bedenken ist – vor dem Hintergrund der Schwere des Krankheitsbilds – aus unserer Sicht eine MGM zur PTBS-Prävention grundsätzlich begrüßenswert, sollte jedoch derzeit nur im Rahmen klinischer Studien erfolgen. Hierfür stellen wir acht forschungsethische Aspekte zur Diskussion, die bei solchen Studien zu berücksichtigen sind. (shrink)

Research on the use of propranolol as a pharmacological memory dampening treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder is continuing and justifies a second look at the legal and ethical issues raised in the past. We summarize the general ethical and legal issues raised in the literature so far, and we select two for in-depth reconsideration. We address the concern that a traumatized witness may be less effective in a prosecution emerging from the traumatic event after memory dampening treatment. We analyze this (...) issue in relation to sexual assault, where the suggestion that corroborating evidence may remedy any memory defects is less likely to be helpful. We also consider the clinical ethical question about a physician's obligation to discuss potential legal consequences of memory dampening treatment. We conclude that this latter question reflects a general problem related to novel medical treatments where the broader socio-legal consequences may be poorly understood, and suggest that issues of this sort could usefully be addressed through the promulgation of practice guidelines. (shrink)

Post-traumatic stress disorder is a “young” disorder formally recognized in the early 1980s, although the symptoms have been noted for centuries particularly in relation to military conflicts. PTSD may develop after a serious traumatic experience that induces feelings of intense fear, helplessness or horror. It is currently characterized by three key classes of symptoms which must cause clinically significant distress or impairment of functioning: persistent and distressing re-experiencing of the trauma; persistent avoidance of stimuli associated with the trauma and numbing (...) of general responsiveness; and persistent symptoms of hyper-arousal. One of the possible symptoms within the second class is difficulty in remembering an important aspect of the traumatic event.PTSD is not an uncommon condition, with an estimated lifetime prevalence of about 7-9% based on studies conducted in the United States and Canada, with women at higher risk than men. While not everyone who experiences a significant trauma will go on to develop PTSD, about a third will do so. Sexual assault, along with other forms of assaultive violence, pose a comparatively high risk of PTSD. (shrink)

The neurosciences not only challenge assumptions about the mind’s place in the natural world but also urge us to reconsider its role in the normative world. Based on mind-brain dualism, the law affords only one-sided protection: it systematically protects bodies and brains, but only fragmentarily minds and mental states. The fundamental question, in what ways people may legitimately change mental states of others, is largely unexplored in legal thinking. With novel technologies to both intervene into minds and detect mental activity, (...) the law should, we suggest, introduce stand alone protection for the inner sphere of persons. We shall address some metaphysical questions concerning physical and mental harm and demonstrate gaps in current doctrines, especially in regard to manipulative interferences with decision-making processes. We then outline some reasons for the law to recognize a human right to mental liberty and propose elements of a novel criminal offence proscribing severe interventions into other minds. (shrink)