Science and technology are advancing more rapidly than regulations or the law can interpret and integrate them into a supportive or regulatory framework. This book is written for all clinicians in the neurosciences specialties who need to examine and re-examine the ethical and legal implications of advances in clinical neurosciences.
Written by an eminent authority from the American Academy of Neurology's Committee on Ethics, Law, and Humanities, this book is an excellent text for all clinicians interested in ethical decision-making. The book features outstanding presentations on dying and palliative care, physician-assisted suicide and voluntary active euthanasia, medical futility, and the relationship between ethics and the law. New chapters in this edition discuss how clinicians resolve ethical dilemmas in practice and explore ethical issues in neuroscience research. Other highlights include updated material on palliative sedation, advance directives, ICU withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy, gene therapy, the very-low-birth-weight premature infant, the developmentally disabled patient, informed consent, organizational ethics, brain death controversies, and fMRI and PET studies relating to persistent vegetative state.
Behavioral neuroscience encompasses the disciplines of neurobiology and psychology to study mechanisms of behavior. This volume provides a contemporary overview of the current state of how ethics informs behavioral neuroscience research. There is dual emphasis on ethical challenges in experimental animal approaches and in clinical and nonclinical research involving human participants.
Advances in our understanding of the brain and rapid advances in the medical practice of neurology are creating questions and concerns from an ethical and legal perspective. Ethical and Legal Issues in Neurology provides a detailed review of various general aspects of neuroethics, and contains chapters dealing with a vast array of specific issues such as the role of religion, the ethics of invasive neuroscience research, and the impact of potential misconduct in neurologic practice. The book focuses particular attention on problems related to palliative care, euthanasia, dementia, and neurogenetic disorders, and concludes with examinations of consciousness, personal identity, and the definition of death. This volume focuses on practices not only in North America but also in Europe and the developing world. It is a useful resource for all neuroscience and neurology professionals, researchers, students, scholars, practicing clinical neurologists, mental health professionals, and psychiatrists. A comprehensive introduction and reference on neuroethics Includes coverage of how best to understand the ethics and legal aspects of dementia, palliative care, euthanasia and neurogenetic disorders Brings clarity to issues regarding ethics and legal responsibilities in the age of rapidly evolving brain science and related clinical practice
The increasing conduct of clinical research in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) is motivated by the desire to promote host country access to biomedical research, to enhance LMIC access to modern clinical care, and opportunities to conduct research with simpler regulatory requirements and at lower cost. Yet clinical research in LMIC is associated with ethical risks beyond those of clinical research conducted in high-income countries (HIC). Ethical challenges particular to clinical research in LMIC include the conduct of placebo-controlled clinical trials in LMIC despite HIC availability of effective comparator interventions, obtaining informed consent despite power inequities, and the obligation of HIC researchers to redress health disparities in LMIC. This chapter covers these and additional ethical challenges of clinical research in LMIC, and proposes ways to navigate these challenges through awareness, regulatory oversight, consultation, and collaboration with LMIC investigators and community representatives. With its ethical challenges properly managed, clinical research in LMIC provides historic opportunities to bring biomedical research and better healthcare infrastructure to countries previously left behind in the modern rush to biomedical innovation.
The first time I read the medical consent and authorization. it had registered in my mind simply as a legal document. Now I began to understand what it meant. It was a letter of ultimate love and trust. (Schucking. 1985. p. 268) Ever since Karen Ann Quinlan slipped into permanent unconsciousness in 1975 and her father agonized publicly over whether she should remain indefinitely on a respirator (In re Quinlan, 1976), the desires of patients, their families, and their friends to limit the application of apparently limitless medical technology have been a pressing concern for ethics, law, and public policy. Ms. Quinlan's case contained nearly all the elements of the problems we still face: vague, general, but sincere prior oral statements suggesting that she would not want continued treatment; a family attempting to do what they saw as best for her; and physicians uncertain whether to use medical judgment alone (and if so, what the "right" medical decision was), to preserve her life at all costs, or to honor the family's interpretation of their daughter's choice. Most ironically, once she was removed from her respirator, she did not die. Karen Quinlan - like dozens of other names made famous by court decisions, newspaper stories, and television evening news - has come to symbolize a tangled knot of issues surrounding the end of life and who controls it.
Clinical ethics is the application of ethical theories, principles, rules, and guidelines to clinical situations in medicine. Therefore, clinical ethics is analogous to clinical medicine in that general principles and concepts must be applied intelligently and thoughtfully to unique clinical circumstances. The three major ethical theories are consequentialism, whereby the consequences of an action determine whether it is ethical; deontology, whereby to be ethical is to do one’s duty, and virtue ethics, whereby ethics is a matter of cultivating appropriate virtues. In the real world of medicine, most people find that all three perspectives offer useful insights and are complementary rather than contradictory. The most common approach to clinical ethical analysis is principlism. According to principlism, the medical practitioner must attempt to uphold four important principles: respect for patient autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. When these principles conflict, resolving them depends on the details of the case. Alternative approaches to medical ethics, including the primacy of beneficence, care-based ethics, feminist ethics, and narrative ethics, help to define the limitations of principlism and provide a broader perspective on medical ethics.
This book offers a comprehensive analysis of philosophical, social, ethical, and legal challenges arising as a consequences of current advances in neurosciences and neurotechnology. It starts by offering an overview of fundamental concepts such as mental privacy, personal autonomy, mental integrity, and responsibility, among others. In turn, it discusses the influence of possible misuses or uncontrolled uses of neurotechnology on those concepts, and, more in general, on human rights and equality. Then, it makes some original proposals to deal with the main ethical, legal, and social problems associated to the use of neurotechnology, both in medicine and in everyday life, suggesting possible policies to protect privacy, neural data, and intimacy. Crossing the borders between humanities, natural sciences, bio-medicine, and engineering, and taking into account geographical and cultural differences, this book offers a conceptual debate around policy and decision making concerning some of the key neuroethical challenges of our times. It offers a comprehensive guide to the most important issues of neurojustice and neuroprotection, together with a set of new paradigms to face some of the most urgent neuroethical problems of our times.
A history of past abuses on research with human subjects has led to various sets of rules that are designed to insure ethical practices to protect research subjects appropriately. To understand these rules, it is important to appreciate the significant differences between being a patient, where protecting the best interests of that patient is the primary goal, and being a research subject, where that is generally not the case. In the research setting, there can be a conflict between attempting to answer the research question, and doing what is best for the subject. The rules for conducting research with human subjects attempt to manage this conflict in an ethically acceptable manner. This chapter provides an overview of those rules, including a somewhat extended discussion of the U.S. “Common Rule” as a particular example.
