People have been thinking of reading a person's mind throughout centuries. With the aid of advanced technologies, especially functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we have successfully to execute some simple mind readings. However, as we meet the success in brain mapping more and more frequently, ethical issues arise, especially when we talk about the potential abuses that may unavoidably occur. Once this advantageous technology is being abused or misused, it will become dangerous. For example, terrorists may capture a military officer, scan the officer's brain, obtain any top military secret and plan for their next attack. Therefore, minimizing potential unethical abuses of this technology is crucial; we should at least have strict rules and regulations on its usage, typically by whom and to whom it is allowed.
First, the ownership of related machines should be with the government, that is, no any individual or non-governmental organisation (NGO) is allowed to own such device; even the manufacturing role is to be restricted. By having this rule, the access to this technology will be controllable. We can have a trace of who has accessed it. Some may suggest restricting the ownership and accessibility by licensing; however, licenses do not promise us the “real” user of the device is authorised, so licensing is not a good solution.
Second, we should identify to whom this technology can be used. The most important requirement is the permission by the one whose brain is to be mapped. We cannot force anyone, who is unwilling, to be brain-mapped. Besides, this technology should be used only on those who really need a brain mapping, such as Pick’s disease patient, as we still don’t know whether if there is any side effect to the mapped brain.
In conclusion, brain mapping is naturally a beneficial technology. The pros or cons that it will bring rely completely on by whom and to whom it is used. To eliminate any possibility of abuse, rules and regulations must be made, and more importantly, we must follow them.
First, the ownership of related machines should be with the government, that is, no any individual or non-governmental organisation (NGO) is allowed to own such device; even the manufacturing role is to be restricted. By having this rule, the access to this technology will be controllable. We can have a trace of who has accessed it. Some may suggest restricting the ownership and accessibility by licensing; however, licenses do not promise us the “real” user of the device is authorised, so licensing is not a good solution.
Second, we should identify to whom this technology can be used. The most important requirement is the permission by the one whose brain is to be mapped. We cannot force anyone, who is unwilling, to be brain-mapped. Besides, this technology should be used only on those who really need a brain mapping, such as Pick’s disease patient, as we still don’t know whether if there is any side effect to the mapped brain.
In conclusion, brain mapping is naturally a beneficial technology. The pros or cons that it will bring rely completely on by whom and to whom it is used. To eliminate any possibility of abuse, rules and regulations must be made, and more importantly, we must follow them.
3 comments:
agree that rules must be seted, no rules, no safety.
Only rules and regulations about who and whom brain mapping can be used can minimize the abuses.
DENTX ACADEMY, the institution with a unique curriculum and fusion of the best practices in Dental and Medical Sciences in association with LINCOLN UNIVERSITY (Malaysia) . It is our everlasting passion that has driven us towards training our students with unsurpassed skills in Clinical, Academic, and Research domains.
We believe that our ultimate success would be to see our students become strong confident successful professionals who not only treat their patients with perfection but also have an endless passion and dedication towards the profession.
Post a Comment