Moral philosopher questions memory manipulation

Is medicated memory manipulation ethically sound? And perhaps more importantly, who should be charged with the decision to deliver such a treatment: patient or physician?

Elisa Hurley, a philosophy professor, is seeking answers to these questions in her research currently underway at The University of Western Ontario.

In the Academy Award-winning film Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, a fictional, non-surgical procedure called ‘targeted memory erasure’ is used to delete painful memories the afflicted wish to forget – permanently.

And while the story’s science-fiction based concept earned the movie an Oscar for best original screenplay, real-life scientists are conducting clinical trials today using beta-blockers – drugs traditionally used for varying heart conditions – for manipulating the memories of people, who may go on to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Hurley says while the real threat of developing PTSD might be a good enough reason to use beta-blockers as a preventative measure, she also wants policy makers to consider the ramifications of what such a treatment may mean to a person’s moral well-being.

“Beta-blockers do not cause amnesia. Rather they make memories less vivid, detailed and arousing,” explains Hurley, who specializes in bioethics. “They lessen the emotional impact when someone is recalling upsetting events.”

Citing examples of a woman who has been brutally raped or a soldier who has killed while serving in the military, Hurley says, “In types of trauma involving interpersonal violence, such as sexual violence, torture, combat stress, and genocide, emotional memories may play a crucial role in one’s moral recovery.”

With respect to the military case, she adds, “I suggest that dampening emotional responses such as guilt, revulsion, and regret to someone’s participation in wrongdoing may undermine an appropriate understanding by the person of his or her moral responsibility.”

Source: University of Western Ontario

Related stories:

Who shalt not kill? Brain power leads to level-headedness when faced with moral dilemmas
Should a sergeant sacrifice a wounded private on the battlefield in order to save the rest of his troops? Is euthanasia acceptable if it prevents needless suffering? Many of us will have to face some sort of extreme moral choice such as these at least once in our life.
Are humans hardwired for fairness?
Is fairness simply a ruse, something we adopt only when we secretly see an advantage in it for ourselves" Many psychologists have in recent years moved away from this purely utilitarian view, dismissing it as too simplistic. Recent advances in both cognitive science and neuroscience now allow psychologists to approach this question in some different ways, and they are getting some intriguing results.
Doctors and medical ethicist discuss whether doctors should participate in capital punishment
Should doctors be involved in the state-ordered administration of capital punishment? In the September issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings, three anesthesiologists and a medical ethicist take an in-depth look at this question in a commentary and two editorials.
Sleep deprivation affects moral judgment
Research has shown that bad sleep can adversely affect a person's physical health and emotional well-being. However, the amount of sleep one gets can also influence his or her decision-making. A study published in the March 1st issue of the journal Sleep finds that sleep deprivation impairs the ability to integrate emotion and cognition to guide moral judgments.
Just what the doctor ordered: Britain marks 60 years of the NHS
Gordon Brown is trying to burnish his record on the 60th anniversary of Britain's National Health Service Saturday, but experts say the ploy could misfire as both he and it struggle to get off the sick list.
Experimental philosophy movement explores real-life dilemmas
Imagine a business executive who thinks: "I know that this new policy will harm the environment, but I don't care at all about that – I just want to increase profits." Is the business executive harming the environment intentionally? Faced with this question from a University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill philosopher, 82 percent of people polled said yes.
Disclosure of organ transplant risks: A question of when, not if
University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine physicians and bioethicists are calling for a new, more standardized way for patients in need of organ transplants to be informed of the risks they face. If adopted, their policy recommendations could promote greater equity in how organs are allocated while restricting patients' abilities to "cherry-pick" the best organs.
Senate reaches an agreement on global AIDS bill
(AP) -- Senate negotiators said Wednesday they had reached a tentative agreement on a key obstacle to one of the most ambitious federal health initiatives ever, a $50 billion act to combat AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis in Africa and other countries hard-hit by those diseases.

News discussion:

General Science news