|
1
|
Ligthart S, Ienca M, Meynen G, Molnar-Gabor F, Andorno R, Bublitz C, Catley P, Claydon L, Douglas T, Farahany N, Fins JJ, Goering S, Haselager P, Jotterand F, Lavazza A, McCay A, Wajnerman Paz A, Rainey S, Ryberg J, Kellmeyer P. Minding Rights: Mapping Ethical and Legal Foundations of 'Neurorights'. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2023:1-21. [PMID: 37183686 DOI: 10.1017/s0963180123000245] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/16/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sjors Ligthart
- Willem Pompe Institute for Criminal Law and Criminology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Denmark; Department of Criminal Law, Tilburg University, Tilberg, The Netherlands
| | - Marcello Ienca
- School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Germany & College of Humanities, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Gerben Meynen
- Willem Pompe Institute for Criminal Law and Criminology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Denmark; Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Roberto Andorno
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | | | - Paul Catley
- School of Law, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
| | - Lisa Claydon
- School of Law, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
| | | | | | - Joseph J Fins
- Division of Medical Ethics, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sara Goering
- Department of Philosophy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Pim Haselager
- Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition, and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Fabrice Jotterand
- Center for Bioethics and Medical Humanities, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
| | | | - Allan McCay
- The University of Sydney Law School, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Abel Wajnerman Paz
- Instituto de Éticas Aplicadas, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Stephen Rainey
- Ethics and Philosophy of Technology Section, Delft University, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Jesper Ryberg
- Department of Philosophy, Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark
| | - Philipp Kellmeyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Freiburg - Medical Center, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Inglese S, Lavazza A. What Should We Do With People Who Cannot or Do Not Want to Be Protected From Neurotechnological Threats? Front Hum Neurosci 2021; 15:703092. [PMID: 34421562 PMCID: PMC8371680 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.703092] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2021] [Accepted: 07/13/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Neurotechnologies can pose a threat to people's privacy and mental integrity. Hence the proposal of establishing neurorights (Ienca and Andorno, 2017) and technical principles for the implementation of these rights (Lavazza, 2018). However, concepts such as "the extended mind" and what might be called "the post-human objection" can be said to challenge this protection paradigm. On the one hand, it may be difficult to outline the cognitive boundaries between humans and machines (with the consequent ethical and legal implications). On the other hand, those who wish to make strong use of neurotechnologies, or even hybridize with them, reject the idea that privacy and mental integrity should be protected. However, from the latter view, issues may arise relating to the protection of persons entering into relationships with posthumanist people. This article will discuss these scenarios as well as the ethical, legal, social, and political issues that could follow from them.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Silvia Inglese
- Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Lavazza
- Department of Neuroethics, Centro Universitario Internazionale, Arezzo, Italy
- University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|