Litcius/Paper detail

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

Sara Goering, Andrew Ivan Brown, Eran Klein

2024The Hastings Center Report21 citationsDOIOpen Access PDF

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.

Topics & Concepts

Argument (complex analysis)Vulnerability (computing)BeneficenceContext (archaeology)Quantum entanglementPsychologySociologyPolitical scienceLawMedicineComputer securityAutonomyComputer scienceHistoryQuantumQuantum mechanicsInternal medicinePhysicsArchaeologyNeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical InnovationsNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringNeurological disorders and treatments
Brain Pioneers and Moral Entanglement: An Argument for Post‐trial Responsibilities in Neural‐Device Trials | Litcius