Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

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 journalArticleScientificpeer-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
    Publication statusPublished - 26 May 2019

    Keywords

    • AUTONOMY
    • AGENCY
    • Deep brain stimulation
    • IDENTITY
    • Neuroethics
    • SELF
    • Multidisciplinary research
    • Interdisciplinary methodology

    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