Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Oct 2;6(4):4-11.
doi: 10.1080/21507740.2015.1076087. Epub 2015 Nov 30.

A Threat to Autonomy? The Intrusion of Predictive Brain Implants

Affiliations

A Threat to Autonomy? The Intrusion of Predictive Brain Implants

Frederic Gilbert. AJOB Neurosci. .

Abstract

The world's first-in-human clinical trial using invasive intelligent brain devices-devices that predict specific neuronal events directly to the implanted person-has been completed with significant success. Predicting brain activity before specific outcomes occur brings a raft of unprecedented applications, especially when implants offer advice on how to respond to the neuronal events forecasted. Although these novel predictive and advisory implantable devices offer great potential to positively affect patients following surgery by enhancing quality of life (e.g., provide control over symptoms), substantial ethical concerns remain. The invasive nature of these novel devices is not unique; however, the inclusion of predictive and advisory functionalities within the implants, involving permanent monitoring of brain activity in real time, raises new ethical issues to explore, especially in relation to concerns for patient autonomy. What might be the effects of ongoing monitoring of predictive and advisory brain technologies on a patient's postoperative sense of autonomy? The role played by predictive and advisory implantable brain devices on patient's feelings of autonomy following surgery is completely unknown. The first section of this article addresses this shortcoming by reporting on a pilot study that we conducted with one of the patients implanted with one of these novel brain devices. The second section examines how overreliance on predictive and advisory brain technologies may threaten patients' autonomy. The third section looks into ethical problems concerning how devices delivering automated therapeutic responses might, hypothetically speaking, be used to monitor and control individual's autonomy through inhibition of undesirable behaviors.

Keywords: advisory system; automated control; autonomy; brain; brain implants; predictive brain devices; undesirable behaviors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Atkins K. Autonomy and the subjective character of experience. Journal of Applied Philosophy. 2000;7(1):71–79. - PubMed
    1. Baylis F.2013“I am who I am”: On the perceived threats to personal identity from deep brain stimulation Neuroethics6513–26. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Beauchamp T. L., Childress J. F. Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.; 2013.
    1. Charles . Deep brain stimulation in early Parkinson's disease: Enrollment experience from a pilot trial. Parkinsonism and Related Disorders. 2012;18(3):268–73. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cook M., O'Brien T. J., Berkovic S. F., et al. Prediction of seizure likelihood with a long-term, implanted seizure advisory system in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy: A first-in-man study. Lancet Neurology. 2013;12(6):563–71. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources