The Ethics of Smart Pills and Self-Acting Devices: Autonomy, Truth-Telling, and Trust at the Dawn of Digital Medicine
American Journal of Bioethics 18 (9):38-47 (2018)
Abstract
Digital medicine is a medical treatment that combines technology with drug delivery. The promises of this combination are continuous and remote monitoring, better disease management, self-tracking, self-management of diseases, and improved treatment adherence. These devices pose ethical challenges for patients, providers, and the social practice of medicine. For patients, having both informed consent and a user agreement raises questions of understanding for autonomy and informed consent, therapeutic misconception, external influences on decision making, confidentiality and privacy, and device dependability. For providers, digital medicine changes the relationship where trust can be verified, clinicians can be monitored, expectations must be managed, and new liability risks may be assumed. Other ethical questions include direct third-party monitoring of health treatment, affordability, and planning for adverse events in the case of device malfunction. This article seeks to lay out the ethical landscape for the implementation of such devices in patient care.Author's Profile
DOI
10.1080/15265161.2018.1498933
My notes
Similar books and articles
Implantable Smart Technologies : Defining the ‘Sting’ in Data and Device.Gill Haddow, Shawn H. E. Harmon & Leah Gilman - 2016 - Health Care Analysis 24 (3):210-227.
Smart Pills for Psychosis: The Tricky Ethical Challenges of Digital Medicine for Serious Mental Illness.Anna K. Swartz - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (9):65-67.
Balancing truth-telling in the preservation of hope: A relational ethics approach.P. Pergert & K. Lutzen - 2012 - Nursing Ethics 19 (1):21-29.
Cosmetic neurology: the role of healthcare professionals. [REVIEW]Kinan Muhammed - 2014 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 17 (2):239-240.
Truth-telling in clinical practice and the arguments for and against: a review of the literature. [REVIEW]Anthony G. Tuckett - 2004 - Nursing Ethics 11 (5):500-513.
Antonella Surbone.Truth Telling - 2000 - In Raphael Cohen-Almagor (ed.), Medical Ethics at the Dawn of the 21st Century. New York Academy of Sciences. pp. 913--52.
Truth telling in medicine: The confucian view.Ruiping Fan & Benfu Li - 2004 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 29 (2):179 – 193.
Book Review: Crisis of Authority: Politics, Trust, and Truth-Telling in Freud and Foucault, by Nancy LuxonCrisis of Authority: Politics, Trust, and Truth-Telling in Freud and Foucault, by LuxonNancy. 379 pp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. [REVIEW]Renée Heberle - 2017 - Political Theory 45 (4):566-570.
Philosophy of Psychopharmacology: Smart Pills, Happy Pills, and Pepp Pills.Dan J. Stein - 2008 - Cambridge University Press.
What is Meant by Telling the Truth: Bonhoeffer on the Ethics of Disclosure.Nancy Berlinger - 2003 - Studies in Christian Ethics 16 (2):80-92.
Truth telling, autonomy and the role of metaphor.D. Kirklin - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (1):11-14.
Ravines and Sugar Pills: Defending Deceptive Placebo Use.Jonathan Pugh - 2015 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 40 (1):83-101.
Analytics
Added to PP
2018-09-21
Downloads
46 (#256,261)
6 months
1 (#449,220)
2018-09-21
Downloads
46 (#256,261)
6 months
1 (#449,220)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
Technology Changes the Ethical Stakes in HIV Surveillance and Prevention: Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Reassessing the Ethics of Molecular HIV Surveillance in the Era of Cluster Detection and Response”.Stephen Molldrem & Anthony K. J. Smith - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (10):W1-W3.
Resisting the Digital Medicine Panopticon: Toward a Bioethics of the Oppressed.Adrian Guta, Jijian Voronka & Marilou Gagnon - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (9):62-64.
Smart Pills for Psychosis: The Tricky Ethical Challenges of Digital Medicine for Serious Mental Illness.Anna K. Swartz - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (9):65-67.
Digital Medicine: An Opportunity to Revisit the Role of Bioethicists.Karin R. Jongsma, Annelien L. Bredenoord & Federica Lucivero - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (9):69-70.
What is a Bioethics of the Oppressed in the Age of COVID-19?Craig M. Klugman - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (10):29-31.
References found in this work
The Obligation to Participate in Biomedical Research.G. Owen Schaefer, Ezekiel J. Emanuel & Alan Wertheimer - 2009 - Journal of the American Medical Association 302 (1):67-72.
Therapeutic Misconception in Clinical Research: Frequency and Risk Factors.Paul S. Appelbaum, Charles W. Lidz & Thomas Grisso - 2004 - IRB: Ethics & Human Research 26 (2):1.
Why Is Therapeutic Misconception So Prevalent?Charles W. Lidz, Karen Albert, Paul Appelbaum, Laura B. Dunn, Eve Overton & Ekaterina Pivovarova - 2015 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (2):231-241.
Mental Health Apps: Innovations, Risks and Ethical Considerations.Kyriaki G. Giota - 2014 - E-Health Telecommunication Systems and Networks 3:19-23.