On the Significance of the Identity Debate in DBS and the Need of an Inclusive Research Agenda. A Reply to Gilbert, Viana and Ineichen

A. Snoek*, S. de Haan, M. Schermer, D. Horstkotter

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

4 Citations (Web of Science)

Abstract

Gilbert et al. (Neuroethics, 2018) argue that the concerns about the influence of Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) on - as they lump together - personality, identity, agency, autonomy, authenticity and the self (PIAAAS) are due to an ethics hype. They argue that there is only a small empirical base for an extended ethics debate. We will critically examine their claims and argue that Gilbert and colleagues do not show that the identity debate in DBS is a bubble, they in fact give very little evidence for that. Rather they show the challenges of doing research in a field that is stretched out over multiple disciplines. In that sense their paper is an important starting point for a discussion on methodology and offers valuable lessons for a future research agenda.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)65-74
Number of pages10
JournalNeuroethics
Volume14
Issue numberSUPPL 1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2021

Keywords

  • Autonomy
  • Agency
  • Deep brain stimulation
  • Identity
  • Neuroethics
  • Self
  • Multidisciplinary research
  • Interdisciplinary methodology
  • DEEP BRAIN-STIMULATION
  • PARKINSONS-DISEASE
  • NEUROSURGERY

Cite this