Brain Pioneers and Moral Entanglement: An Argument for Post-trial Responsibilities in Neural-Device Trials

Sara Goering, Andrew I. Brown, Eran Klein

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

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 languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)24-33
Number of pages10
JournalHastings Center Report
Volume54
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 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

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Brain Pioneers and Moral Entanglement: An Argument for Post-trial Responsibilities in Neural-Device Trials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this