Neuroethics - Important Activity From 2002 To 2009: The History of Neuroethics

Important Activity From 2002 To 2009: The History of Neuroethics

There is no doubt that people were thinking and writing about the ethical implications of neuroscience for many years before the field adopted the label “neuroethics,” and some of this work remains of great relevance and value. However, the early 21st century saw a tremendous upsurge in interest in the ethics of neuroscience, as evidenced by numerous meetings, publications and organizations dedicated to this topic.

In 2002 there were several meetings that drew together neuroscientists and ethicists to discuss neuroethics: the American Association for the Advancement of Science with the journal Neuron, University of Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics with the Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, the Royal Society of London, and Stanford University and the Dana Foundation. This last meeting was the largest, and resulted in a book, Neuroethics: Mapping the Field, edited by Steven J. Marcus and published by Dana Press. That same year the Economist ran a cover story entitled “---“ and articles on neuroethics began to appear in neuroscience journals, specifically in Nature Neuroscience, Neuron and a special issue of Brain and Cognition.

From 2003-2005 the number of neuroethics meetings, symposia and publications continued to grow. The 38,000 plus members of the Society for Neuroscience recognized the importance of neuroethics by inaugurating an annual “special lecture” on the topic, first given by Donald Kennedy, editor-in-chief of Science Magazine. Several overlapping networks of scientists and scholars began to coalesce around neuroethics-related projects and themes. For example, the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities established a Neuroethics Affinity Group, students at the London School of Economics established the Neuroscience and Society Network linking scholars from several different institutions, and a group of scientists and funders from around the world began discussing ways to support international collaboration in neuroethics through what came to be called the International Neuroethics Network. Stanford began publishing the monthly Stanford Neuroethics Newsletter, Penn developed the informational website, neuroethics.upenn.edu, and the Neuroethics and Law Blog was launched.

Several relevant books were published during this time as well: Sandra Ackerman’s Hard Science, Hard Choices: Facts, Ethics and Policies Guiding Brain Science Today (Dana Press), Michael Gazzaniga’s The Ethical Brain (Dana Press), Judy Illes’ edited volume, Neuroethics: Defining the Issues in Theory, Practice and Policy (both Oxford University Press), Dai Rees and Steven Rose’s edited volume “The New Brain Sciences: Perils and Prospects (Cambridge University Press) and Steven Rose’s The Future of the Brain (Oxford University Press).

2006 marked the founding of the International Neuroethics Society (originally the Neuroethics Society), an international group of scholars, scientists, clinicians, and other professionals who share an interest in the social, legal, ethical and policy implications of advances in neuroscience. The mission of the International Neuroethics Society "is to promote the development and responsible application of neuroscience through interdisciplinary and international research, education, outreach and public engagement for the benefit of people of all nations, ethnicities, and cultures." Steven Hyman agreed to be the first President of the Neuroethics Society.

In 2007 the National Core for Neuroethics was established at the University of British Columbia, in Vancouver, Canada, with mandate to tackle the ethical, legal, policy and social implications of frontier neuroscience through high impact research, education and outreach to ensure the close alignment of innovation and human values.

In 2008, the Center for Neurotechnology Studies of the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies in Arlington, Virginia, was formed to study those neuroethical, legal and social issues arising from the development and use of neuroscientifically-based technologies (such as neuroimaging, neurogenetics and neuroproteomics, deep brain and transcranial magnetic stimulation, nano-neuroscientific methods, novel pharmacological agents and pharmaceutics, brain-machine interfacing, and cognitive machine systems) in research and applications in medicine, public life and national security, intelligence and defense. The Center sponsors and presents the Capital Consortium for Neuroscience, Ethics, Legal and Social issues (CCNELSI), a monthly lecture and symposium series in the greater metropolitan Washington DC-region, and the annual national Neuroscience- Ethics, Legal and Social Issues (NELSI) conference series.

In January 2009, The University of Oxford established The Wellcome Centre for Neuroethics. The centre aims to address concerns about the effects neuroscience and neurotechnologies will have on various aspects of human life. Its research focuses on five key areas: cognitive enhancement; borderline consciousness and severe neurological impairment; free will, responsibility and addiction; the neuroscience of morality and decision-making; and applied neuroethics.

In the same year, the University of Pennsylvania expanded their neuroethics program with the opening of the cross-school Center for Neuroscience & Society. The stated mission of this Center is to increase understanding of the impact of neuroscience on society through research and teaching, and to encourage the responsible use of neuroscience for the benefit of humanity .

Read more about this topic:  Neuroethics

Famous quotes containing the words important, activity and/or history:

    There’s one basic rule you should remember about development charts that will save you countless hours of worry.... The fact that a child passes through a particular developmental stage is always more important than the age of that child when he or she does it. In the long run, it really doesn’t matter whether you learn to walk at ten months or fifteen months—as long as you learn how to walk.
    Lawrence Kutner (20th century)

    History does nothing; it does not possess immense riches, it does not fight battles. It is men, real, living, who do all this.... It is not “history” which uses men as a means of achieving—as if it were an individual person—its own ends. History is nothing but the activity of men in pursuit of their ends.
    Karl Marx (1818–1883)

    To care for the quarrels of the past, to identify oneself passionately with a cause that became, politically speaking, a losing cause with the birth of the modern world, is to experience a kind of straining against reality, a rebellious nonconformity that, again, is rare in America, where children are instructed in the virtues of the system they live under, as though history had achieved a happy ending in American civics.
    Mary McCarthy (1912–1989)