Voluntary Rehabilitation? On Neurotechnological Behavioural Treatment, Valid Consent and (In)appropriate Offers
Neuroethics 6 (1):65-77 (2013)
|Abstract||Criminal offenders may be offered to participate in voluntary rehabilitation programs aiming at correcting undesirable behaviour, as a condition of early release. Behavioural treatment may include direct intervention into the central nervous system (CNS). This article discusses under which circumstances voluntary rehabilitation by CNS intervention is justified. It is argued that although the context of voluntary rehabilitation is a coercive circumstance, consent may still be effective, in the sense that it can meet formal criteria for informed consent. Further, for a consent to be normatively valid (“take the wronging out of the act”) under a coercive circumstance, the subject to be treated must (1) have the sovereign authority to consent, and (2) the offer-giver must be in the right normative position to make the offer. While I argue that subjects do have the sovereign authority to consent to treatment, I also argue that inappropriate offers yield invalid consents. Considerations on inappropriate offers should therefore inform which kinds of CNS intervention-based rehabilitation schemes the state may propose as part of the criminal justice system. Yet as I conclude in this paper, while there are some intrinsic constraints on voluntary rehabilitation programs, the main constraints on voluntary rehabilitation are likely to be contingent overriders. However, CNS intervention is not ruled out as such in the context of voluntary rehabilitation|
|Keywords||Voluntary rehabilitation CNS intervention Autonomy Valid consent (In)appropriate offers|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jesper Ryberg & Thomas S. Petersen (2013). Neurotechnological Behavioural Treatment of Criminal Offenders—A Comment on Bomann-Larsen. Neuroethics 6 (1):79-83.
Andrew Day (2011). Offender Rehabilitation: Current Problems and Ethically Informed Approaches to Intervention. Ethics and Social Welfare 5 (4):348-360.
Mark Sherer (2005). Rehabilitation of Impaired Awareness. In Walter M. Jr. High, Angelle M. Sander, Margaret A. Struchen & Karen A. Hart (eds.), Rehabilitation for Traumatic Brain Injury. Oxford University Press.
Augustine Frimpong-mansoh (2008). Culture and Voluntary Informed Consent in African Health Care Systems. Developing World Bioethics 8 (2):104-114.
Deborah Bowman (2011). Informed Consent: A Primer for Clinical Practice. Cambridge University Press.
Robert M. Nelson, Tom Beauchamp, Victoria A. Miller, William Reynolds, Richard F. Ittenbach & Mary Frances Luce (2011). The Concept of Voluntary Consent. American Journal of Bioethics 11 (8):6-16.
Torbjörn Tännsjö (2006). Non-Voluntary Sterilization. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 31 (4):401 – 415.
Edmund Henden (2013). Heroin Addiction and Voluntary Choice: The Case of Informed Consent. Bioethics 27 (7):395-401.
Frederic Gilbert, Andrej Vranic & Samia Hurst (2013). Involuntary & Voluntary Invasive Brain Surgery: Ethical Issues Related to Acquired Aggressiveness. [REVIEW] Neuroethics 6 (1):115-128.
J. M. Fleming & T. Ownsworth (2006). A Review of Awareness Interventions in Brain Injury Rehabilitation. [REVIEW] Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 16 (4):474-500.
Peter W. Halligan (2006). Awareness and Knowing: Implications for Rehabilitation. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 16 (4):456-473.
Shaun D. Pattinson (2009). Consent and Informational Responsibility. Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (3):176-179.
Stephen D. Mallary, Bernard Gert & Charles M. Culver (1986). Family Coercion and Valid Consent. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 7 (2).
Joseph T. Giacino & Charlotte T. Trott (2004). Rehabilitative Management of Patients with Disorders of Consciousness: Grand Rounds. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 19 (3):254-265.
Added to index2011-03-21
Total downloads29 ( #48,084 of 722,863 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #26,028 of 722,863 )
How can I increase my downloads?