Baseball and Bioethics Revisited: The Pitch Clock and Age Discrimination in a Timeless Pastime

In this essay, the author reflects on a decade's old essay on baseball and bioethics inspired by a conversation with the late David Thomasma. In a reprise of his earlier paper, Fins worries that modernity has come to baseball with the advent of the pitch clock and that this innovation brings age discrimination to a timeless pastime.

A Descriptive Analysis of Access to Assistive Technology in Children With Acquired Brain Injury: The Right to Assistive Devices

OBJECTIVE

Pediatric clinicians caring for children with acquired brain injury have noted that many individuals requiring assistive technology (AT) go unserved or face delays until devices are obtained, with potential adverse implications for recovery and development. In this article we map the pathways by which AT is prescribed and assess delays and barriers to access.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with moderate to severe brain injury admitted to Blythedale Children's Hospital over a 2-year period using a database drawn from the medical record.

RESULTS

We identified 72 children diagnosed with brain injury requiring at least 1 device. Devices were used to improve mobility and positioning, self-care, safety, and communication, and enable access to other technologies and foster social integration. We found that 55% of devices were delivered, with most deliveries to home or the hospital's outpatient department for fitting, training, and instruction. Time to delivery ranged from 12 to 250 days with an average of 69.4 days. Twenty percent of nondeliveries were attributable to change in medical status, transfer to a skilled nursing facility, or continued inpatient status, while 31% were canceled by the family. Other nondeliveries were attributed to insurance coverage. We also found that the medical record is not designed for the longitudinal tracking of devices, indicating the need for a prospective process to document the AT trajectory.

CONCLUSION

Instead of tolerating delays and denials, there should be a normative expectation that children have a right to medically necessary devices, consistent with disability law. This analysis was undertaken as a step toward formulating a prospective means of tracking AT recommendations, approvals, denials, and/or deliveries. Our findings should be understood as a promissory note toward structural reforms that are reflective of society's responsibility to better meet the needs of vulnerable children and their families.

Cognitive Motor Dissociation: Gap Analysis and Future Directions

BACKGROUND

Patients with disorders of consciousness who are behaviorally unresponsive may demonstrate volitional brain responses to motor imagery or motor commands detectable on functional magnetic resonance imaging or electroencephalography. This state of cognitive motor dissociation (CMD) may have prognostic significance.

METHODS

The Neurocritical Care Society's Curing Coma Campaign identified an international group of experts who convened in a series of monthly online meetings between September 2021 and April 2023 to examine the science of CMD and identify key knowledge gaps and unmet needs.

RESULTS

The group identified major knowledge gaps in CMD research: (1) lack of information about patient experiences and caregiver accounts of CMD, (2) limited epidemiological data on CMD, (3) uncertainty about underlying mechanisms of CMD, (4) methodological variability that limits testing of CMD as a biomarker for prognostication and treatment trials, (5) educational gaps for health care personnel about the incidence and potential prognostic relevance of CMD, and (6) challenges related to identification of patients with CMD who may be able to communicate using brain-computer interfaces.

CONCLUSIONS

To improve the management of patients with disorders of consciousness, research efforts should address these mechanistic, epidemiological, bioengineering, and educational gaps to enable large-scale implementation of CMD assessment in clinical practice.

Identity Theft, Deep Brain Stimulation, and the Primacy of Post-trial Obligations

Patient narratives from two investigational deep brain stimulation trials for traumatic brain injury and obsessive-compulsive disorder reveal that injury and illness rob individuals of personal identity and that neuromodulation can restore it. The early success of these interventions makes a compelling case for continued post-trial access to these technologies. Given the centrality of personal identity to respect for persons, a failure to provide continued access can be understood to represent a metaphorical identity theft. Such a loss recapitulates the pain of an individual's initial injury or illness and becomes especially tragic because it could be prevented by robust policy. A failure to fulfill this normative obligation constitutes a breach of disability law, which would view post-trial access as a means to achieve social reintegration through this neurotechnological accommodation.

Brain injury, medical progress, and the disability paradox: Towards an Americans with Abilities Act

It is helpful to think about the needs of patients with moderate to severe brain injury through the lens of disability law. However, there are limitations to current disability law that contribute to ongoing segregation and marginalization of individuals with severe brain injury. Indeed, one of the paradoxes of American jurisprudence is that more clear constitutional protections accrue to those who have definitively immutable conditions. Thus, as neuroscience brings new therapies to those with brain injury, they may become less protected by the constitutional elements of disability law because their conditions have changed and become mutable. This is the clinical progress that brain injury professionals all seek to achieve, but ironically these advances could potentially degrade the legal protections of patients who benefit from emerging treatments. In this paper, we will critically examine this paradox at the interface of medicine and the law and suggest that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) could be nicely complemented by legislation we have named the Americans with Abilities Act (AWAA). Instead of focusing on disabilities that need protection, the AWAA seeks to sustain and foster newfound abilities made possible by the fruits of medicine and neuroscience.

Toward a Social Bioethics Through Interpretivism: A Framework for Healthcare Ethics

Recent global events demonstrate that analytical frameworks to aid professionals in healthcare ethics must consider the pervasive role of social structures in the emergence of bioethical issues. To address this, the authors propose a new sociologically informed approach to healthcare ethics that they term "social bioethics." Their approach is animated by the interpretive social sciences to highlight how social structures operate vis-à-vis the everyday practices and moral reasoning of individuals, a phenomenon known as social discourse. As an exemplar, the authors use social bioethics to reframe common ethical issues in psychiatric services and discuss potential implications. Lastly, the authors discuss how social bioethics illuminates the ways healthcare ethics consultants in both policy and clinical decision-making participate in and shape broader social, political, and economic systems, which then cyclically informs the design and delivery of healthcare.

The Scholarly and Pedagogical Benefits of the Legal Laboratory: Lessons from the Consortium for the Advanced Study of Brain Injury at Yale Law School

In our article, we share the lessons we have learned after creating and running a successful legal laboratory over the past seven years at Yale Law School. Our legal laboratory, which focuses on the intersection of law and severe brain injury, represents a unique pedagogical model for legal academia, and is closely influenced by the biomedical laboratory.

Thalamic deep brain stimulation in traumatic brain injury: a phase 1, randomized feasibility study

Converging evidence indicates that impairments in executive function and information-processing speed limit quality of life and social reentry after moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (msTBI). These deficits reflect dysfunction of frontostriatal networks for which the central lateral (CL) nucleus of the thalamus is a critical node. The primary objective of this feasibility study was to test the safety and efficacy of deep brain stimulation within the CL and the associated medial dorsal tegmental (CL/DTTm) tract.Six participants with msTBI, who were between 3 and 18 years post-injury, underwent surgery with electrode placement guided by imaging and subject-specific biophysical modeling to predict activation of the CL/DTTm tract. The primary efficacy measure was improvement in executive control indexed by processing speed on part B of the trail-making test.All six participants were safely implanted. Five participants completed the study and one was withdrawn for protocol non-compliance. Processing speed on part B of the trail-making test improved 15% to 52% from baseline, exceeding the 10% benchmark for improvement in all five cases.CL/DTTm deep brain stimulation can be safely applied and may improve executive control in patients with msTBI who are in the chronic phase of recovery.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02881151 .

Physician attitudes about disorders of consciousness: Good facts make for good ethics

This commentary is on the original article by Schembs et al. on pages1646–1655of this issue.

Ethics Along the Continuum of Research Involving Persons with Disorders of Consciousness

Interest in disorders of consciousness (DoC) has grown substantially over the past decade and has illuminated the importance of improving understanding of DoC biology; care needs (use of monitoring, performance of interventions, and provision of emotional support); treatment options to promote recovery; and outcome prediction. Exploration of these topics requires awareness of numerous ethics considerations related to rights and resources. The Curing Coma Campaign Ethics Working Group used its expertise in neurocritical care, neuropalliative care, neuroethics, neuroscience, philosophy, and research to formulate an informal review of ethics considerations along the continuum of research involving persons with DoC related to the following: (1) study design; (2) comparison of risks versus benefits; (3) selection of inclusion and exclusion criteria; (4) screening, recruitment, and enrollment; (5) consent; (6) data protection; (7) disclosure of results to surrogates and/or legally authorized representatives; (8) translation of research into practice; (9) identification and management of conflicts of interest; (10) equity and resource availability; and (11) inclusion of minors with DoC in research. Awareness of these ethics considerations when planning and performing research involving persons with DoC will ensure that the participant rights are respected while maximizing the impact and meaningfulness of the research, interpretation of outcomes, and communication of results.

Subject and Family Perspectives from the Central Thalamic Deep Brain Stimulation Trial for Traumatic Brain Injury: Part II

This is the second paper in a two-part series describing subject and family perspectives from the CENTURY-S (CENtral Thalamic Deep Brain Stimulation for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain InjURY-Safety) first-in-human invasive neurological device trial to achieve cognitive restoration in moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (msTBI). To participate, subjects were independently assessed to formally establish decision-making capacity to provide voluntary informed consent. Here, we report on post-operative interviews conducted after a successful trial of thalamic stimulation. All five msTBI subjects met a pre-selected primary endpoint of at least a 10% improvement in completion time on Trail-Making-Test Part B, a marker of executive function. We describe narrative responses of subjects and family members, refracted against that success. Interviews following surgery and the stimulation trial revealed the challenge of adaptation to improvements in cognitive function and emotional regulation as well as altered (and restored) relationships and family dynamics. These improvements exposed barriers to social reintegration made relevant by recoveries once thought inconceivable. The study's success sparked concerns about post-trial access to implanted devices, financing of device maintenance, battery replacement, and on-going care. Most subjects and families identified the need for supportive counseling to adapt to the new trajectory of their lives.

José Manuel Rodríguez Delgado, Walter Freeman, and Psychosurgery: A Study in Contrasts

History has conflated the legacies of José Manuel Rodríguez Delgado and Walter Freeman, midcentury proponents of somatic therapies for neuropsychiatric conditions. Both gained notoriety: Delgado after he appeared on the front page of the New York Times having used his stimoceiver to stop a charging bull in Spain; Freeman as the proponent of lobotomy. Both were the object of critique by the antipsychiatry movement and those who felt that their methods and objectives posed a threat to personal liberty. Using archival sources, we demonstrate that this conflation is a misrepresentation of the historical record and that their methods, objectives, ethics, and philosophical commitments differed widely. Accurate knowledge about historical antecedents is a predicate for ethical analysis and becomes especially relevant information as neuroscience develops circuit-based treatments for conditions such as Parkinson disease, depression, and brain injury. Part of that corrective is to counter the conflation of Delgado's and Freeman's life and work. Appreciating their distinctive legacies can help guide neuropsychiatric research done today that might yet haunt future generations.

Minding Rights: Mapping Ethical and Legal Foundations of 'Neurorights'

The rise of neurotechnologies, especially in combination with artificial intelligence (AI)-based methods for brain data analytics, has given rise to concerns around the protection of mental privacy, mental integrity and cognitive liberty - often framed as "neurorights" in ethical, legal, and policy discussions. Several states are now looking at including neurorights into their constitutional legal frameworks, and international institutions and organizations, such as UNESCO and the Council of Europe, are taking an active interest in developing international policy and governance guidelines on this issue. However, in many discussions of neurorights the philosophical assumptions, ethical frames of reference and legal interpretation are either not made explicit or conflict with each other. The aim of this multidisciplinary work is to provide conceptual, ethical, and legal foundations that allow for facilitating a common minimalist conceptual understanding of mental privacy, mental integrity, and cognitive liberty to facilitate scholarly, legal, and policy discussions.

Prognostic humility and ethical dilemmas after severe brain injury: Summary, recommendations, and qualitative analysis of Curing Coma Campaign virtual event proceedings

Background

Patients with severe acute brain injuries (SABI) are at risk of living with long-term disability, frequent medical complications and high rates of mortality. Determining an individual patient’s prognosis and conveying this to family members/caregivers can be challenging. We conducted a webinar with experts in neurosurgery, neurocritical care, neuro-palliative care, neuro-ethics, and rehabilitation as part of the Curing Coma Campaign, which is supported by the Neurocritical Care Society. The webinar discussed topics focused on prognostic uncertainty, communicating prognosis to family members/caregivers, gaps within healthcare systems, and research infrastructure as it relates to patients experiencing SABI. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe the themes that emerged from this virtual discussion.

Methods

A qualitative analysis of a webinar “Prognostic Humility and Ethical Dilemmas in Acute Brain Injury” was organized as part of the Neurocritical Care Society’s Curing Coma Campaign. A multidisciplinary group of experts was invited as speakers and moderators of the webinar. The content of the webinar was transcribed verbatim. Two qualitative researchers (NK and BM) read and re-read the transcription, and familiarized themselves with the text. The two coders developed and agreed on a code book, independently coded the transcript, and discussed any discrepancies. The transcript was analyzed using inductive thematic analysis of codes and themes that emerged within the expert discussion.

Results

We coded 168 qualitative excerpts within the transcript. Two main themes were discussed: (1) the concept of prognostic uncertainty in the acute setting, and (2) lack of access to and evidence for quality rehabilitation and specialized continuum of care efforts specific to coma research. Within these two main themes, we found 5 sub-themes, which were broken down into 23 unique codes. The most frequently described code was the need for clinicians to acknowledge our own uncertainties when we discuss prognosis with families, which was mentioned 13 times during the webinar. Several strategies were described for speaking with surrogates of patients who have had a severe brain injury resulting in SABI. We also identified important gaps in the United States health system and in research to improve the care of patients with severe brain injuries.

Conclusion

As a result of this webinar and expert discussion, authors identified and analyzed themes related to prognostic uncertainty with SABI. Recommendations were outlined for clinicians who engage with surrogates of patients with SABI to foster informed decisions for their loved one. Finally, recommendations for changes in healthcare systems and research support are provided in order to continue to propel SABI science forward to improve future prognostic certainty.

Daniel Callahan's Decade of Doubt

Daniel Callahan died on July 16, 2019, just short of his 89th birthday. In the years since, we have seen the overturning of abortion rights, a concern central to his scholarship and musings about the place of religion in American civic life. Callahan's journey from lay Catholic journalist and commentator at Commonweal to a co-founder of the Hastings Center, during his decade of doubt, is especially relevant today as America revisits established precedent governing a woman's right to choose. His life-long struggle with faith and the secularization of bioethics is a story worth telling, as it may foster dialogue across a divide between religious and laical thinkers that has fractured our political discourse. We recall Callahan's misgivings about the marginalization of religious perspectives in public life; he sought not the denial of complexity nor of difference in views, but rather the importance of free and honest debate around deeply held beliefs, contextualized in the realities of the contemporary world. Callahan's ambivalence about his faith remains a part of the fabric of American life, a story that Callahan chronicled to our collective benefit for over a half-century.

Challenges and strategies in the psychiatric care of the ultra-Orthodox Jewish population: A thematic analysis of 18 psychiatrist interviews

Despite the importance of accessible psychiatric care for the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community, prior research has characterized how stigma and suspicion of secular institutions limit mental healthcare utilization by this population. No study, however, has interviewed a cohort of psychiatrists to identify commonly encountered challenges or successfully employed strategies in the care of ultra-Orthodox Jewish psychiatric patients who have overcome these barriers to present for care. We recruited by snowball sampling from a sample of convenience 18 psychiatrists affiliated with the Weill Cornell Department of Psychiatry, experienced in the care of ultra-Orthodox Jewish patients. Each participant was engaged in a 20-45-min, semi-structured interview, which was subsequently transcribed, de-identified, and analyzed with combined deductive and inductive thematic analysis. We identified 12 challenges and 11 strategies as particularly significant in psychiatric work with ultra-Orthodox Jewish patients at every phase of treatment, including rapport-building, history-taking, diagnostic formulation, and achieving concordance with patient and family. These challenges and strategies revolved around themes of community stigma, an extended family-patient-community team, cross-cultural communication, culture-related diagnostic complexity, transference/countertransference, and conflicts between Jewish law /community norms and treatment protocol. Psychiatrists caring for ultra-Orthodox Jewish patients face a range of complex challenges stemming from factors unique to ultra-Orthodox Jewish religion, culture, and family/community structure. However, they have also identified strategies to manage these challenges and provide culturally sensitive care. Further research is necessary to directly elicit perspectives from within the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community and validate our initial findings.

Health Equity, History, and a New Presidential Bioethics Commission: Lessons from the "Lost" Reports

Convening a national bioethics commission has historically been one of the most powerful bioethical legacies a US presidential administration can undertake. The Biden Administration has not yet created such a commission; here we argue that centering health equity and healthcare access would provide a vital framework for a new commission's legacy. Moreover, we demonstrate two crucial historical episodes when American presidents appointed commissions to examine the practical and ethical implications of these very issues. We turn first to the 1952 President's Commission report on "Building America's Health," a lofty vision of universal healthcare access stymied by both political conflict and unaddressed problems of racism in the era's legislation. Its rich yet incomplete account of American health inequities serves as a valuable forerunner to questions of justice in bioethics. We then explore the President's Commission's 1983 report "Securing Access to Healthcare: A Report on the Ethical Implications of Differences in the Availability of Health Services." This report took up the mantle of equity in healthcare access, again with mixed results. Only by understanding the checkered history of these overlooked, practically "lost" reports can a new era in American bioethics successfully re-center the goal of equitable health for all.

Ethics Priorities of the Curing Coma Campaign: An Empirical Survey

BACKGROUND

The Curing Coma Campaign (CCC) is a multidisciplinary global initiative focused on evaluation, diagnosis, treatment, research, and prognostication for patients who are comatose due to any etiology. To support this mission, the CCC Ethics Working Group conducted a survey of CCC collaborators to identify the ethics priorities of the CCC and the variability in priorities based on country of practice.

METHODS

An electronic survey on the ethics priorities for the CCC was developed using rank-choice questions and distributed between May and July 2021 to a listserv of the 164 collaborators of the CCC. The median rank for each topic and subtopic was determined. Comparisons were made on the basis of country of practice.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 93 respondents (57% response rate); 67% practiced in the United States. On the basis of respondent ranking of each topic, the prioritization of ethics topics across respondents was as follows: (1) clinical care, (2) diagnostic definitions, (3) clinical research, (4) implementation/innovation, (5) family, (6) data management, (7) public engagement/perceptions, and (8) equity. Respondents who practiced in the United States were particularly concerned about public engagement, the distinction between clinical care and research, disclosure of results from clinical research to families, the definition of "personhood," and the distinction between the self-fulfilling prophecy/nihilism and medical futility. Respondents who practiced in other countries were particularly concerned about diagnostic modalities for clinical care, investigational drugs/devices for clinical research, translation of research into practice, and the definition of "minimally conscious state."

CONCLUSIONS

Collaborators of the CCC considered clinical care, diagnostic definitions, and clinical research the top ethics priorities of the CCC. These priorities should be considered as the CCC explores ways to improve evaluation, diagnosis, treatment, research, and prognostication of patients with coma and associated disorders of consciousness. There is some variability in ethics priorities based on country of practice.

Proceedings of the Second Curing Coma Campaign NIH Symposium: Challenging the Future of Research for Coma and Disorders of Consciousness

This proceedings article presents actionable research targets on the basis of the presentations and discussions at the 2nd Curing Coma National Institutes of Health (NIH) symposium held from May 3 to May 5, 2021. Here, we summarize the background, research priorities, panel discussions, and deliverables discussed during the symposium across six major domains related to disorders of consciousness. The six domains include (1) Biology of Coma, (2) Coma Database, (3) Neuroprognostication, (4) Care of Comatose Patients, (5) Early Clinical Trials, and (6) Long-term Recovery. Following the 1st Curing Coma NIH virtual symposium held on September 9 to September 10, 2020, six workgroups, each consisting of field experts in respective domains, were formed and tasked with identifying gaps and developing key priorities and deliverables to advance the mission of the Curing Coma Campaign. The highly interactive and inspiring presentations and panel discussions during the 3-day virtual NIH symposium identified several action items for the Curing Coma Campaign mission, which we summarize in this article.

Towards a Governance Framework for Brain Data

The increasing availability of brain data within and outside the biomedical field, combined with the application of artificial intelligence (AI) to brain data analysis, poses a challenge for ethics and governance. We identify distinctive ethical implications of brain data acquisition and processing, and outline a multi-level governance framework. This framework is aimed at maximizing the benefits of facilitated brain data collection and further processing for science and medicine whilst minimizing risks and preventing harmful use. The framework consists of four primary areas of regulatory intervention: binding regulation, ethics and soft law, responsible innovation, and human rights.

Should healthcare workers be prioritised during the COVID-19 pandemic? A view from Madrid and New York

While COVID-19 has generated a massive burden of illness worldwide, healthcare workers (HCWs) have been disproportionately exposed to SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus infection. During the so-called 'first wave', infection rates among this population group have ranged between 10% and 20%, raising as high as one in every four COVID-19 patients in Spain at the peak of the crisis. Now that many countries are already dealing with new waves of COVID-19 cases, a potential competition between HCW and non-HCW patients for scarce resources can still be a likely clinical scenario. In this paper, we address the question of whether HCW who become ill with COVID-19 should be prioritised in diagnostic, treatment or resource allocation protocols. We will evaluate some of the proposed arguments both in favour and against the prioritisation of HCW and also consider which clinical circumstances might warrant prioritising HCW and why could it be ethically appropriate to do so. We conclude that prioritising HCW's access to protective equipment, diagnostic tests or even prophylactic or therapeutic drug regimes and vaccines might be ethically defensible. However, prioritising HCWs to receive intensive care unit (ICU) beds or ventilators is a much more nuanced decision, in which arguments such as instrumental value or reciprocity might not be enough, and economic and systemic values will need to be considered.

Prolonged Unconsciousness is Common in COVID-19 and Associated with Hypoxemia

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to estimate the time to recovery of command-following and associations between hypoxemia with time to recovery of command-following.

METHODS

In this multicenter, retrospective, cohort study during the initial surge of the United States' pandemic (March-July 2020) we estimate the time from intubation to recovery of command-following, using Kaplan Meier cumulative-incidence curves and Cox proportional hazard models. Patients were included if they were admitted to 1 of 3 hospitals because of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), required endotracheal intubation for at least 7 days, and experienced impairment of consciousness (Glasgow Coma Scale motor score <6).

RESULTS

Five hundred seventy-one patients of the 795 patients recovered command-following. The median time to recovery of command-following was 30 days (95% confidence interval [CI] = 27-32 days). Median time to recovery of command-following increased by 16 days for patients with at least one episode of an arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2 ) value ≤55 mmHg (p < 0.001), and 25% recovered ≥10 days after cessation of mechanical ventilation. The time to recovery of command-following  was associated with hypoxemia (PaO2  ≤55 mmHg hazard ratio [HR] = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.46-0.68; PaO2  ≤70 HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.85-0.91), and each additional day of hypoxemia decreased the likelihood of recovery, accounting for confounders including sedation. These findings were confirmed among patients without any imagining evidence of structural brain injury (n = 199), and in a non-overlapping second surge cohort (N = 427, October 2020 to April 2021).

INTERPRETATION

Survivors of severe COVID-19 commonly recover consciousness weeks after cessation of mechanical ventilation. Long recovery periods are associated with more severe hypoxemia. This relationship is not explained by sedation or brain injury identified on clinical imaging and should inform decisions about life-sustaining therapies. ANN NEUROL 2022;91:740-755.

Before The Birth of Bioethics: James M. Gustafson at Yale

In the 1960s, tucked away at Yale Divinity School, there was a remarkable confluence of bioethics scholars under the tutelage of James M. Gustafson. His students were Jim Childress, Albert R. Jonsen, Tom Beauchamp, LeRoy Walters, Jim Drane, and Stanley Hauerwas, among others. Jonsen later recalled, "That little group was really the beginning of scholarly bioethics." Yet despite Gustafson's influence on the founding generation of bioethics scholars and his prominence as a leading mid-century Christian theologian, his legacy in bioethics is unsecured. This is an unfortunate omission, as Gustafson's contributions to bioethics were not limited to the classroom. In 1969, he brought Paul Ramsey to Yale to deliver the Lyman Beecher Lectures, a collection of talks that would coalesce into Ramsey's The Patient as Person. Gustafson also advised Daniel Callahan as Callahan and Willard Gaylin founded The Hastings Center, on whose founding board of directors Gustafson later served. Through archival research and interviews with Gustafson's former students and colleagues, we recount his biography, consider his pedagogy, and examine the theological pragmatism that informed his engagement with his students and his intellectual commitments before the birth of bioethics. By reviewing Gustafson's contributions to the nascent field of bioethics, we seek to understand why his legacy has been forgotten and to introduce him to a new generation of bioethics scholars.

Cognitive-Motor Dissociation Following Pediatric Brain Injury: What About the Children?

Background and Objectives

Following severe brain injury, up to 16% of adults showing no clinical signs of cognitive function nonetheless have preserved cognitive capacities detectable via neuroimaging and neurophysiology; this has been designated cognitive-motor dissociation (CMD). Pediatric medicine lacks both practice guidelines for identifying covert cognition and epidemiologic data regarding CMD prevalence.

Methods

We applied a diverse battery of neuroimaging and neurophysiologic tests to evaluate 2 adolescents (aged 15 and 18 years) who had shown no clinical evidence of preserved cognitive function following brain injury at age 9 and 13 years, respectively. Clinical evaluations were consistent with minimally conscious state (minus) and vegetative state, respectively.

Results

Both participants' EEG, and 1 participant's fMRI, provided evidence that they could understand commands and make consistent voluntary decisions to follow them. Both participants' EEG demonstrated larger-than-expected responses to auditory stimuli and intact semantic processing of words in context.

Discussion

These converging lines of evidence lead us to conclude that both participants had preserved cognitive function dissociated from their motor output. Throughout the 5+ years since injury, communication attempts and therapy had remained uninformed by such objective evidence of their cognitive abilities. Proper diagnosis of CMD is an ethical imperative. Children with covert cognition reflect a vulnerable and isolated population; the methods outlined here provide a first step in identifying such persons to advance efforts to alleviate their condition.

Ethics and the 2018 Practice Guideline on Disorders of Consciousness: A Framework for Responsible Implementation

The 2018 practice guideline on disorders of consciousness marks an important turning point in the care of patients with severe brain injury. As clinicians and health systems implement the guideline in practice, several ethical challenges will arise in assessing the benefits, harms, feasibility, and cost of recommended interventions. We provide guidance for clinicians when interpreting these recommendations and call on professional societies to develop an ethical framework to complement the guideline as it is implemented in clinical practice.

Dignity of Risk, Reemergent Agency, and the Central Thalamic Stimulation Trial for Moderate to Severe Brain Injury

This article discusses the utility of Perske's "dignity of risk" as a useful heuristic to explain the consent process for a study to evaluate central thalamic deep brain stimulation as a means to restore cognitive function in moderate to severe brain injury. Narratives of interviews with subjects and their families from a related BRAIN Initiative study reveal discordant views on risk, with subjects being more risk-tolerant than their loved ones. This is a challenge for families who remain protective of subjects who have recovered to the point that they are capable of independent decision-making. While the legal threshold for consent has been met, normative and psychological challenges remain as families accommodate themselves to the reemergent agency of the subject. Dignity of risk is a constructive framework to apprehend how families come to appreciate the primacy of the subject's voice and affirm their reemergent agency following a devastating brain injury.

Consciousness, Conflations, and Disability Rights: Denials of Care for Children in the "Minimally Conscious State"

This essay critiques the fiercely utilitarian allocation scheme of Cameron et al. Children have no hope of recovery if their lives are cut short based on administrative protocols that misrepresent the nature of their conditions. Unilateral futility judgements - especially those based on a false predicate - are discriminatory. When considering the best interests of children, we should see possibility in disability and not advance ill-informed utilitarianism.

The neuroethics of disorders of consciousness: a brief history of evolving ideas

Neuroethical questions raised by recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of disorders of consciousness are rapidly expanding, increasingly relevant, and yet underexplored. The aim of this thematic review is to provide a clinically applicable framework for understanding the current taxonomy of disorders of consciousness and to propose an approach to identifying and critically evaluating actionable neuroethical issues that are frequently encountered in research and clinical care for this vulnerable population. Increased awareness of these issues and clarity about opportunities for optimizing ethically-responsible care in this domain are especially timely given recent surges in critically ill patients with unusually prolonged disorders of consciousness associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) around the world. We begin with an overview of the field of neuroethics: what it is, its history and evolution in the context of biomedical ethics at large. We then explore nomenclature used in disorders of consciousness, covering categories proposed by the American Academy of Neurology, the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine, and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research, including definitions of terms such as coma, the vegetative state, unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, minimally conscious state, covert consciousness, and the confusional state. We discuss why these definitions matter, and why there has been such evolution in this nosology over the years, from Jennett and Plum in 1972 to the Multi-Society Task Force in 1994, the Aspen Working Group in 2002 and up until the 2018 American and 2020 European Disorders of Consciousness guidelines. We then move to a discussion of clinical aspects of disorders of consciousness, the natural history of recovery, and ethical issues that arise within the context of caring for persons with disorders of consciousness. We conclude with a discussion of key challenges associated with assessing residual consciousness in disorders of consciousness, potential solutions and future directions, including integration of crucial disability rights perspectives.

History and Bioethics

Cultural historians and historians of medicine are a rarity in bioethics. Even those who write histories of bioethics are philosophers, sociologists, or theologians. Where have all the historians gone? If bioethics is to contribute to the urgent work of addressing social justice, structural racism, and health inequity, we bioethicists need to embrace history as a fully constituent part of our field. Historians can help us apprehend the ideas that shaped bioethics, and health policy more broadly, and discover the dissenting arguments that might inspire us now. Given our annus horribilis, history has become an instrumental necessity. It is only through the study of history that we can understand the past so as to reimagine how bioethics can influence health policy and work toward health equity.

Congee for the Soul

Provision of adequate nutrition to elderly patients who develop dysphagia after a stroke can be quite challenging, often leading to the placement of a percutaneous entero-gastrostomy (PEG) tube for nutritional support. This hypothetical case describes the additional challenge of cross-cultural belief that leads a daughter to provide oral feeding to her mother, an act that the medical team believes is dangerous and the daughter sees as salubrious. In this case, what is the proper balance between patient safety and deference to cultural traditions and norms? Where are the limits? Two commentaries offer insights for conflict resolution, including recommending that the medical team seek to understand the cultural motivations of the family, balancing safety and respect for cultural norms. The second commentary also disagrees with the team's presumption that the daughter's feeding of her mother is a greater threat to the patient than the PEG tube feeding is.

International Legal Approaches to Neurosurgery for Psychiatric Disorders

Neurosurgery for psychiatric disorders (NPD), also sometimes referred to as psychosurgery, is rapidly evolving, with new techniques and indications being investigated actively. Many within the field have suggested that some form of guidelines or regulations are needed to help ensure that a promising field develops safely. Multiple countries have enacted specific laws regulating NPD. This article reviews NPD-specific laws drawn from North and South America, Asia and Europe, in order to identify the typical form and contents of these laws and to set the groundwork for the design of an optimal regulation for the field. Key challenges for this design that are revealed by the review are how to define the scope of the law (what should be regulated), what types of regulations are required (eligibility criteria, approval procedures, data collection, and oversight mechanisms), and how to approach international harmonization given the potential migration of researchers and patients.

When No One Notices: Disorders of Consciousness and the Chronic Vegetative State

On January 5, 2019, the Associated Press reported that a woman thought to have been in the vegetative state for over a decade gave birth at a Hacienda HealthCare facility. Until she delivered, the staff at the Phoenix center had not noticed that their patient was pregnant. The patient was also misdiagnosed. Misdiagnosis of patients with disorders of consciousness in institutional settings is more the norm than the exception. Misdiagnosis is also connected to a broad and extremely significant change in the understanding of the vegetative state-a change that the field of bioethics has not yet fully taken into account. In September 2018, the American Academy of Neurology, the American College of Rehabilitation Medicine, and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research issued a comprehensive evidence-based review on disorders of consciousness and an associated practice guideline on the care of these patients. These landmark publications update the 1994 Multi-Society Task Force Report on the Vegetative State, which subcategorized the persistent vegetative state as either persistent (once the vegetative state lasted one month) or permanent (once the vegetative state lasted three months after anoxic injury or twelve months after traumatic injury). Noting that 20 percent of patients thought to be permanently unconscious might regain some level of consciousness, the new guideline has eliminated the permanent vegetative state as a diagnostic category, replacing it with the chronic vegetative state.