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.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11060429PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hast.1566DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

moral entanglement
8
implanted neurotechnology
8
brain pioneers
4
pioneers moral
4
entanglement argument
4
argument post-trial
4
post-trial responsibilities
4
responsibilities neural-device
4
neural-device trials
4
trials argue
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!