Neuroethical Guidelines

General principles and existing frameworks

Neuroethical Principles

Who has the right to use brain data & how it can be used?

Privacy of data is a concern common in use of many different technologies including artificial intelligence (AI), social networks, and the internet, however the involvement of neural data poses a novel problem for privacy. Use of neurotechnology risks unauthorized access to patients’ internal mental processes and the collection, analysis, and use of their brain data. This data may contain highly private information, could be used to identify an individual and even to discriminate against them based on their mental health or apparent neurological predispositions.

Example:
The use of BCI technology may allow others to gain access to users' private thoughts and emotions without their explicit consent. We have less control of what neural data we choose to share or protect, unlike with other forms of personal data.

How will brain technologies affect our sense of self and our free will?

Example:
The use of deep brain stimulation (DBS) to treat treatment-resistant depression may impact patients' sense of self and interfere with the autonomy they have over their own emotions and decisions.

How do we democratize access to brain-based therapeutics?

Equity and justice concern the importance of ensuring everyone has fair opportunity to access and benefit from neurotechnologies and brain interventions, regardless of factors including age, gender, race, and socioeconomic status. The benefits of neurotechnologies ought not be limited to a small number of privileged individuals, rather the goal should be to be able to offer them to those who would benefit from them.

Example:
The cost of therapeutic interventions may mean that lower-income individuals may not be able to access neurotechnological treatments. Only those who can afford it will be able to benefit from the technology.

How can we ensure neurotechnology users are fully aware of the implications of use?

Capacity and consent concern the ability of individuals to make informed decisions about their participation in neuroscience research or use of neurotechnology and neuroscience for treatments and other brain interventions. The capacity of individuals to make informed decisions must be considered to determine whether they have the cognitive abilities to make decisions about treatments or provide consent. Consent refers to the voluntary and informed agreement given by an individual to participate in research, undergo a medical treatment or neurotechnological intervention.

Example:
Patients with some degree of cognitive impairment, as a result of Alzheimer's disease for instance, may not have the capacity to give consent to receiving a treatment. It is important that informed consent be obtained appropriately, for example from an authorized representative for the patient.

How can we anticipate potential harmful uses of a technology?

There is often the potential for neurotechnologies and brain interventions to be used for purposes other than their original intended use. This could have beneficial or harmful outcomes—it is critical that these applications be proactively addressed to minimize potential harms and maximize beneficial outcomes.

Example:
Psychopharmaceutical drugs developed to address the cognitive impairments associated with disorders like ADHD may be used off-label by healthy individuals trying to enhance their cognitive abilities. Using these drugs as cognitive enhancers, differing from their intended medical purpose, may give these healthy individuals an unfair advantage in some settings.

How do we ensure the physical, psychological, and emotional safety of patients and users?

When applying neuroscience-based medical treatments, neurotechnologies and other brain interventions it is crucial that the well-being and safety of users is prioritized. Potential risks and harms to participants in research, patients and other users should be minimized—this is often done by adhering to strict safety standards and protocols. Safeguarding the autonomy, rights, and privacy of individuals will ensure their protection and that all involved in research and treatments are treated with respect, dignity, and fairness.

Example:
When conducting clinical trials on new neurotechnologies it is crucial that researchers abide by strict protocols in order to minimize the risk to the study participants. This includes ensuring that informed consent has been obtained from every participant.

Existing Neuroethical Frameworks and Guidelines

Here are some examples of existing guidelines developed by some organizations and initiatives at the forefront of neurotechnological innovation and neuroethical practice.

IEEE Neuroethics Framework

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)

"...addressing the Ethical, Legal, Social,
and Cultural Implications of Neurotechnology"

VIEW HERE

Report of the International Bioethics Committee of UNESCO on the Ethical Issues of Neurotechnology

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)

"... investigate the intersection between neurotechnology, ethics and human rights, and consider the adaptive interpretation of human rights in light of the application of emerging technologies to human brain activities."

VIEW HERE

Recommendation on Responsible Innovation in Neurotechnology

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

"...to guide governments and innovators to anticipate and address the ethical, legal and social challenges raised by novel neurotechnologies while promoting innovation in the field."

VIEW HERE