A password will be e-mailed to you.

A Need for Neurolaw? Human Rights Laws May Need Revision in Neurotech Future

Summary: Researchers propose four new human rights laws that could help protect against exploitation and privacy loss in the age of neurotechnology.

Source: Biomed Central.

New human rights laws to prepare for advances in neurotechnology that put the ‘freedom of the mind’ at risk have been proposed today in the open access journal Life Sciences, Society and Policy.

The authors of the study suggest four new human rights laws could emerge in the near future to protect against exploitation and loss of privacy. The four laws are: the right to cognitive liberty, the right to mental privacy, the right to mental integrity and the right to psychological continuity.

Marcello Ienca, lead author and PhD student at the Institute for Biomedical Ethics at the University of Basel, said: “The mind is considered to be the last refuge of personal freedom and self-determination, but advances in neural engineering, brain imaging and neurotechnology put the freedom of the mind at risk. Our proposed laws would give people the right to refuse coercive and invasive neurotechnology, protect the privacy of data collected by neurotechnology, and protect the physical and psychological aspects of the mind from damage by the misuse of neurotechnology.”

Advances in neurotechnology, such as sophisticated brain imaging and the development of brain-computer interfaces, have led to these technologies moving away from a clinical setting and into the consumer domain. While these advances may be beneficial for individuals and society, there is a risk that the technology could be misused and create unprecedented threats to personal freedom.

Professor Roberto Andorno, co-author of the research, explained: “Brain imaging technology has already reached a point where there is discussion over its legitimacy in criminal court, for example as a tool for assessing criminal responsibility or even the risk of reoffending. Consumer companies are using brain imaging for ‘neuromarketing’, to understand consumer behaviour and elicit desired responses from customers. There are also tools such as ‘brain decoders’ which can turn brain imaging data into images, text or sound. All of these could pose a threat to personal freedom which we sought to address with the development of four new human rights laws.”

The authors explain that as neurotechnology improves and becomes commonplace, there is a risk that the technology could be hacked, allowing a third-party to ‘eavesdrop’ on someone’s mind. In the future, a brain-computer interface used to control consumer technology could put the user at risk of physical and psychological damage caused by a third-party attack on the technology. There are also ethical and legal concerns over the protection of data generated by these devices that need to be considered.

Image shows a person and computer code.

Advances in neurotechnology, such as sophisticated brain imaging and the development of brain-computer interfaces, have led to these technologies moving away from a clinical setting and into the consumer domain. While these advances may be beneficial for individuals and society, there is a risk that the technology could be misused and create unprecedented threats to personal freedom. NeuroscienceNews.com image is for illustrative purposes only.

International human rights laws make no specific mention to neuroscience, although advances in biomedicine have become intertwined with laws, such as those concerning human genetic data. Similar to the historical trajectory of the genetic revolution, the authors state that the on-going neurorevolution will force a reconceptualization of human rights laws and even the creation of new ones.

Marcello Ienca added: “Science-fiction can teach us a lot about the potential threat of technology. Neurotechnology featured in famous stories has in some cases already become a reality, while others are inching ever closer, or exist as military and commercial prototypes. We need to be prepared to deal with the impact these technologies will have on our personal freedom.”

About this neuroscience research article

Source: Matthew Lam – Biomed Central
Image Source: NeuroscienceNews.com image is in the public domain.
Original Research: Full open access research for “Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnologyā€¯ by Marcello Ienca and Roberto Andorno in Life Sciences, Society and Policy. Published online April 26 2017 doi:10.1186/s40504-017-0050-1

Cite This NeuroscienceNews.com Article
Biomed Central “A Need for Neurolaw? Human Rights Laws May Need Revision in Neurotech Future.” NeuroscienceNews. NeuroscienceNews, 28 April 2017.
<http://neurosciencenews.com/neurolaw-human-rights-6534/>.
Biomed Central (2017, April 28). A Need for Neurolaw? Human Rights Laws May Need Revision in Neurotech Future. NeuroscienceNew. Retrieved April 28, 2017 from http://neurosciencenews.com/neurolaw-human-rights-6534/
Biomed Central “A Need for Neurolaw? Human Rights Laws May Need Revision in Neurotech Future.” http://neurosciencenews.com/neurolaw-human-rights-6534/ (accessed April 28, 2017).

Abstract

Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology

Rapid advancements in human neuroscience and neurotechnology open unprecedented possibilities for accessing, collecting, sharing and manipulating information from the human brain. Such applications raise important challenges to human rights principles that need to be addressed to prevent unintended consequences. This paper assesses the implications of emerging neurotechnology applications in the context of the human rights framework and suggests that existing human rights may not be sufficient to respond to these emerging issues. After analysing the relationship between neuroscience and human rights, we identify four new rights that may become of great relevance in the coming decades: the right to cognitive liberty, the right to mental privacy, the right to mental integrity, and the right to psychological continuity.

Thou canst not touch the freedom of my mind

John Milton

“Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnologyā€¯ by Marcello Ienca and Roberto Andorno in Life Sciences, Society and Policy. Published online April 26 2017 doi:10.1186/s40504-017-0050-1

Feel free to share this Neuroscience News.
Join our Newsletter
Sign up to receive the latest neuroscience headlines and summaries sent to your email daily from NeuroscienceNews.com
We hate spam. Your email address will not be sold or shared with anyone else.
No more articles