A healthcare approach to mental integrity

Area of Science:

• Neuroethics
• Human Rights Law
• Philosophy of Mind

Background:

• Current human rights frameworks offer some protection against neurotechnology risks.
• Debates exist on whether new or reconceptualized rights are needed to address emerging neuro-risks.
• Existing proposals to reconceptualize mental integrity risk conflating it with autonomy.

Purpose of the Study:

• To analyze the ethical dimension of mental integrity in light of neurotechnological advancements.
• To evaluate whether current reconceptualizations of mental integrity adequately address ethical concerns not covered by existing rights.
• To propose an alternative conceptualization of mental integrity distinct from autonomy.

Main Methods:

• Conceptual analysis of mental integrity, autonomy, and human rights.
• Review of existing literature on neuroethics and legal rights.
• Development of a novel framework for mental integrity based on a comprehensive notion of mental health.

Main Results:

• Current reconceptualizations of mental integrity often equate it with cognitive control, a component of autonomy.
• A comprehensive view of mental health supports a dual characterization of mental integrity.
• Mental integrity can be understood as both a positive right to interventions promoting neural function and a negative right against harmful interventions.

Conclusions:

• The proposed view of mental integrity is dissociated from cognitive control, allowing for a clear distinction from autonomy.
• This reconceptualization offers a more robust framework for protecting individuals in the age of neurotechnology.
• The positive and negative rights associated with mental integrity provide a more comprehensive ethical and legal safeguard.