Abstract
We argue that in implanted neurotechnology research, participants and researchers experience what Henry Richardson has called “moral entanglement.” Participants partially entrust researchers with access to their brains and thus to information that would otherwise be private, leading to created intimacies and special obligations of beneficence for researchers and research funding agencies. One of these obligations, we argue, is about continued access to beneficial technology once a trial ends. We make the case for moral entanglement in this context through exploration of participants’ vulnerability, uncompensated risks and burdens, depth of relationship with the research team, and dependence on researchers in implanted neurotechnology trials.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 24-33 |
Number of pages | 10 |
Journal | Hastings Center Report |
Volume | 54 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Jan 1 2024 |
Keywords
- dependence
- moral entanglement
- neural device
- neurotechnology
- post-trial obligation
- research ethics
- risk
- vulnerability
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Health(social science)
- Issues, ethics and legal aspects
- Philosophy
- Health Policy