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

Anke Snoek*, Sanneke de Haan, Maartje Schermer, Dorothee Horstkötter

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

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
JournalNeuroethics
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 26 May 2019

Bibliographical note

The authors would sincerely like to thank the two anonymous reviewers, who had great integrity, and provided some of the most engaged comments that we ever had from reviewers. For Sanneke de Haan this work is part of her research programme ‘Authenticity in psychiatry’ with project number 275-20-067, which is financed by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, The Author(s).

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'On the Significance of the Identity Debate in DBS and the Need of an Inclusive Research Agenda. A Reply to Gilbert, Viana and Ineichen'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this