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

doi:10.1007/s12152-019-09411-w

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

Public Health

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

9 Citations (Scopus)

45 Downloads (Pure)

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 language	English
Pages (from-to)	65–74
Journal	Neuroethics
Volume	14
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-019-09411-w
Publication status	Published - 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).

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1007/s12152-019-09411-wLicence: CC BY

On the Significance of the Identity Debate in DBSFinal published version, 284 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{75ec2a1e47ac4dafb93c456307e9668e,

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

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.",

author = "Anke Snoek and \{de Haan\}, Sanneke and Maartje Schermer and Dorothee Horstk{\"o}tter",

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 {\textquoteleft}Authenticity in psychiatry{\textquoteright} with project number 275-20-067, which is financed by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2019, The Author(s).",

year = "2019",

month = may,

day = "26",

doi = "10.1007/s12152-019-09411-w",

language = "English",

volume = "14",

pages = "65–74",

journal = "Neuroethics",

issn = "1874-5490",

publisher = "Springer Science+Business Media",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - On the Significance of the Identity Debate in DBS and the Need of an Inclusive Research Agenda. A Reply to Gilbert, Viana and Ineichen

AU - Snoek, Anke

AU - de Haan, Sanneke

AU - Schermer, Maartje

AU - Horstkötter, Dorothee

N1 - 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).

PY - 2019/5/26

Y1 - 2019/5/26

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85066258997

U2 - 10.1007/s12152-019-09411-w

DO - 10.1007/s12152-019-09411-w

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85066258997

SN - 1874-5490

VL - 14

SP - 65

EP - 74

JO - Neuroethics

JF - Neuroethics

ER -

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

Abstract

Bibliographical note

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this