“It’s all about delivery”: researchers and health professionals’ views on the moral challenges of accessing neurobiological information in the context of psychosis

BMC Medical Ethics 22 (1):1-15 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Background The convergence of neuroscience, genomics, and data science holds promise to unveil the neurobiology of psychosis and to produce new ways of preventing, diagnosing, and treating psychotic illness. Yet, moral challenges arise in neurobiological research and in the clinical translation of research findings. This article investigates the views of relevant actors in mental health on the moral challenges of accessing neurobiological information in the context of psychosis. Methods Semi-structured individual interviews with two groups: researchers employed in the National Health Service (NHS) or a university in England (n = 14), and mental health professionals employed in NHS mental health services (n = 14). This article compares results in the two groups (total n = 28). Results This article presents findings around three conceptual areas: (1) research ethics as mostly unproblematic, (2) psychosis, neurobiological information, and mental health care, and (3) identity, relationships, and the future. These areas are drawn from the themes and topics that emerged in the interviews across the two groups of participants. Researchers and health professionals provided similar accounts of the moral challenges of accessing—which includes acquisition, communication, and use of—neurobiological information in the context of psychosis. Acquiring neurobiological information was perceived as mostly unproblematic, provided ethical safeguards are put in place. Conversely, participants argued that substantive moral challenges arise from how neurobiological information is delivered—that is, communicated and used—in research and in clinical care. Neurobiological information was seen as a powerful tool in the process through which individuals define their identity and establish personal and clinical goals. The pervasiveness of this narrative tool may influence researchers and health professionals’ perception of ethical principles and moral obligations. Conclusions This study suggests that the moral challenges that arise from accessing neurobiological information in the context of psychosis go beyond traditional research and clinical ethics concerns. Reflecting on how accessing neurobiological information can influence individual self-narratives will be vital to ensure the ethical translation of neuroscience and genomics into mental health. Trial registration The study did not involve a health care intervention on human participants. It was retrospectively registered on 11 July 2018, registration number: researchregistry4255.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,853

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What is the role of clinical ethics support in the era of e-medicine?M. Parker - 2001 - Journal of Medical Ethics 27 (suppl 1):33-35.
Biobank research and the right to privacy.Lars Øystein Ursin - 2008 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (4):267-285.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-02-09

Downloads
25 (#633,195)

6 months
12 (#213,779)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Elucidating the concept of vulnerability: Layers not labels.Florencia Luna - 2009 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 2 (1):121-139.
The Role of Empirical Research in Bioethics.Alexander A. Kon - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (6-7):59-65.
Narrative identity.Dan P. McAdams - 2011 - In Seth J. Schwartz, Koen Luyckx & Vivian L. Vignoles (eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research. New York: Springer Science+Business Media. pp. 99--115.

View all 20 references / Add more references