Identity Theft, Deep Brain Stimulation, and the Primacy of Post-trial Obligations

Hastings Cent Rep. 2024 Jan;54(1):34-41. doi: 10.1002/hast.1567.

Abstract

Patient narratives from two investigational deep brain stimulation trials for traumatic brain injury and obsessive-compulsive disorder reveal that injury and illness rob individuals of personal identity and that neuromodulation can restore it. The early success of these interventions makes a compelling case for continued post-trial access to these technologies. Given the centrality of personal identity to respect for persons, a failure to provide continued access can be understood to represent a metaphorical identity theft. Such a loss recapitulates the pain of an individual's initial injury or illness and becomes especially tragic because it could be prevented by robust policy. A failure to fulfill this normative obligation constitutes a breach of disability law, which would view post-trial access as a means to achieve social reintegration through this neurotechnological accommodation.

Keywords: deep brain stimulation; disability rights; identity theft; obsessive-compulsive disorder; personal identity; research ethics; traumatic brain injury.

MeSH terms

  • Aftercare
  • Deep Brain Stimulation* / methods
  • Duty to Recontact
  • Humans
  • Moral Obligations
  • Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder* / therapy