Comparison of philosophical concerns between professionals and the public regarding two psychiatric treatments

References

• Ahlin, J. 2018. The impossibility of reliably determining the authenticity of desires: Implications for informed consent. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 21 (1):43–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aikins, R. D. 2011. Academic performance enhancement: A qualitative study of the perceptions and habits of prescription stimulant–using college students. Journal of College Student Development 52 (5):560–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baylis, F. 2013. “I Am Who I Am”: On the perceived threats to personal identity from deep brain stimulation. Neuroethics 6 (3):513–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bjorklund, P. 2005. Can there be a ‘cosmetic’ psychopharmacology? prozac unplugged: the search for an ontologically distinct cosmetic psychopharmacology. Nursing Philosophy 6 (2):131–43.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2):77–101.
   Google Scholar
• Cabrera, L. Y. 2015. How does enhancing cognition affect human values? How does this translate into social responsibility? Current Topics in Behavioral Neurosciences. 19:223–41. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cabrera, L. Y., N. S. Fitz, and P. B. Reiner. 2015. Reasons for comfort and discomfort with pharmacological enhancement of cognitive, affective, and social domains. Neuroethics 8 (2):93–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cabrera, L. Y., H. Boyce, R. McKenzie, and R. Bluhm. 2018. Conflicts of interest and industry professional relationships in psychiatric neurosurgery: a comparative literature review. Neurosurgical FOCUS 45 (2):E20. doi:10.3171/2018.4.FOCUS17399
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caulfield, T. 2016. Ethics hype? The Hastings Center Report 46 (5):13–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerullo, M. A. 2006. Cosmetic psychopharmacology and the president's council on bioethics. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 49 (4):515–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chi, M. T. H. 1997. Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 6 (3):271–315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Haan, S., E. Rietveld, M. Stokhof, and D. Denys. 2017. Becoming more oneself? changes in personality following DBS treatment for psychiatric disorders: Experiences of OCD patients and general considerations. Edited by Christian Schmahl. PLoS One 12 (4):e0175748–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeGrazia, D. 2000. Prozac, enhancement, and self-creation. Hastings Center Report 39 (2):34–40.
   Google Scholar
• de Zwaan, M. 2001. Binge eating disorder and obesity. International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders 25: 1:S51–S5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Devlin, M. J. 2007. Is there a place for obesity in DSM-V. International Journal of Eating Disorders 40 (S3):S83–S8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elliott, C. 2000. Pursued by happiness and beaten senseless. Prozac and the american dream. The Hastings Center Report 30 (2):7–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elliott, C. 2004. Better than well: American medicine meets the american dream. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Elliott, C., and T. Chambers. 2004. Prozac as a way of life. North Carolina: UNC Press Books.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, S. 1996. Impure science: AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge. (Vol. 7). California: Univ of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Farah, M. J., M. E. Smith, I. Ilieva, and R. H. Hamilton. 2014. Cognitive enhancement. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 5 (1):95–103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faridani, S., E. Bitton, K. Ryokai, and K. Goldberg. 2010. Opinion space: a scalable tool for browsing online comments, in Proc. ofCHI10.ACM (New York: ACMPress), pp. 1175–1184.
   Google Scholar
• Fins, J. J., A. R. Rezai, and B. D. Greenberg. 2006. Psychosurgery: Avoiding an ethical redux while advancing a therapeutic future. Neurosurgery 59 (4):713–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franke, A. G., C. Bagusat, P. Dietz, I. Hoffmann, P. Simon, R. Ulrich, and K. Lieb. 2013. Use of illicit and prescription drugs for cognitive or mood enhancement among surgeons. BMC Medicine 11:102–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franke, A. G., C. Bonertz, M. Christmann, M. Huss, A. Fellgiebel, E. Hildt, and K. Lieb. 2011. Non-medical use of prescription stimulants and illicit use of stimulants for cognitive enhancement in pupils and students in Germany. Pharmacopsychiatry 44 (2):60–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert, F., E. Goddard, J. N. M. Viaña, A. Carter, and M. Horne. 2017. I miss being me: phenomenological effects of deep brain stimulation. AJOB Neuroscience 8 (2):96–109.
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, F. 2013. Deep brain stimulation for treatment resistant depression: postoperative feelings of self-estrangement, suicide attempt and impulsive–aggressive behaviours. Neuroethics 6 (3):473–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert, F. 2015. A threat to autonomy? the intrusion of predictive brain implants. AJOB Neuroscience 6 (4):4–11.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Glannon, W. 2014. Neuromodulation, agency and autonomy. Brain Topography 27 (1):46–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goddard, E. 2017. Deep brain stimulation through the “lens of agency”: clarifying threats to personal identity from neurological intervention. Neuroethics 10 (3):325–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goering, S. 2014. Is it still me? DBS, agency, and the extended, relational me. AJOB Neuroscience 5 (4):50–1.
   Google Scholar
• Goering, S. 2015. Stimulating autonomy: DBS and the prospect of choosing to control ourselves through stimulation. AJOB Neuroscience 6 (4):1–3.
   Google Scholar
• Goering, S., E. Klein, D. D. Dougherty, and A. S. Widge. 2017. Staying in the loop: relational agency and identity in next-generation DBS for psychiatry. AJOB Neuroscience 8 (2):59–70.
   Google Scholar
• Goldenberg, M. J. 2016. Public misunderstanding of science? reframing the problem of vaccine hesitancy. Perspectives on Science 24 (5):552–81.
   Google Scholar
• Goold, I., and H. Maslen. 2014. Must the surgeon take the pill? negligence duty in the context of cognitive enhancement. The Modern Law Review 77 (1):60–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hariz, G., P. Limousin, and K. Hamberg. 2016. DBS means everything – for some time". patients’ perspectives on daily life with deep brain stimulation for parkinson’s disease. Journal of Parkinson's Disease 6 (2):335–47.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Henrich, N., and B. Holmes. 2013. Web news readers' comments: towards developing a methodology for using on-line comments in social inquiry. Journal of Media and Communication Studies 5 (1):1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Hesse, B. W., D. E. Nelson, G. L. Kreps, R. T. Croyle, N. K. Arora, B. K. Rimer, and K. Viswanath. 2005. Trust and sources of health information: the impact of the internet and its implications for health care providers: Findings from the first health information national trends survey. Archives of Internal Medicine 165 (22):2618–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ineichen, C., H. Baumann-Vogel, and M. Christen. 2016. Deep brain stimulation: in search of reliable instruments for assessing complex personality-related changes. Brain Sciences 6 (3):40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jotterand, F., and J. Giordano. 2011. Transcranial magnetic stimulation, deep brain stimulation and personal identity: Ethical questions, and neuroethical approaches for medical practice. International Review of Psychiatry 23:476–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kesey, K. 2002. One flew over the cuckoo's nest. New York: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Klaming, L., and P. Haselager. 2013. Did my brain implant make me do it? questions raised by DBS regarding psychological continuity, responsibility for action and mental competence. Neuroethics 6 (3):527–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klerman, G. L. 1972. Psychotropic hedonism vs. pharmacological calvinism. Hastings Center Report 2 (4):1–3.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Koivuniemi, A., and K. Otto. 2014. When “altering brain function” becomes “mind control. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience 8 (October):1–6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kraemer, F. 2011. Authenticity anyone? the enhancement of emotions via neuro-psychopharmacology. Neuroethics 4 (1):51–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kraemer, F. 2013. Authenticity or autonomy? when deep brain stimulation causes a dilemma. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (12):757–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kramer, P. D. 1993. Listening to prozac. New York: Viking Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Leykin, Y., P. P. Christopher, P. E. Holtzheimer, P. S. Appelbaum, H. S. Mayberg, S. H. Lisanby, and L. B. Dunn. 2011. Participants’ perceptions of deep brain stimulation research for treatment-resistant depression: risks, benefits, and therapeutic misconception. AJOB Primary Research 2 (4):33–41.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lipsman, N., and W. Glannon. 2013. Brain, mind and machine: What are the implications of deep brain stimulation for perceptions of personal identity, agency and free will? Bioethics 27 (9):465–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackenzie, C., and M. Walker. 2015. Neurotechnologies, personal identity, and the ethics of authenticity. In Handbook of neuroethics, ed. N. Levy, 373–92. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Maslen, H., J. Pugh, and J. Savulescu. 2015. The ethics of deep brain stimulation for the treatment of anorexia nervosa. Neuroethics 8 (3):215–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathews, D. J. H. 2011. Deep brain stimulation, personal identity and policy. International Review of Psychiatry 23 (5):486–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mendelsohn, D., N. Lipsman, A. M. Lozano, T. Taira, and M. Bernstein. 2013. The contemporary practice of psychiatric surgery: Results from a global survey of functional neurosurgeons. Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery 91 (5):306–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohamed, A. D. 2014. Neuroethical issues in pharmacological cognitive enhancement. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 5 (5):533–49.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller, S., M. Bittlinger, and H. Walter. 2017. Threats to neurosurgical patients posed by the personal identity debate. Neuroethics 66 (12):1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Müller, U. J., J. Voges, J. Steiner, I. Galazky, H.-J. Heinze, M. Möller, J. Pisapia, C. Halpern, A. Caplan, B. Bogerts, and J. Kuhn. 2013. Deep brain stimulation of the nucleus accumbens for the treatment of addiction. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1282:119–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nyholm, S., and E. O'Neill. 2016. Deep brain stimulation, continuity over time, and the true self. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics : CQ : The International Journal of Healthcare Ethics Committees 25 (4):647–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petersen, M. A., L. S. Nørgaard, and J. M. Traulsen. 2015. Pursuing pleasures of productivity: University students’ use of prescription stimulants for enhancement and the moral uncertainty of making work fun. Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry 39 (4):665–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saldana, J. 2008. An intro to codes and coding. In The coding manual for qualitative researchers, 1–31. New York: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Sandberg, A., and N. Bostrom. 2006. Converging cognitive enhancements. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1093 (1):201–27.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schechtman, M. 2010. Philosophical reflections on narrative and deep brain stimulation. The Journal of Clinical Ethics 21 (2):133
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schermer, M. 2011. Ethical issues in deep brain stimulation. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience 5 (May):1–5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Singh, I. 2013. Not robots: Children’s perspectives on authenticity, moral agency and stimulant drug treatments. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (6):359–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, D. T. 2014. The diminished resistance to medicalization in psychiatry: psychoanalysis meets the medical model of Mental Illness. Society and Mental Health 4 (2):75–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snaith, R. P. 1994. Psychosurgery. Controversy and enquiry. The British Journal of Psychiatry: The Journal of Mental Science 165 (5):582–4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sperry, L., and H. Prosen. 1998. Contemporary ethical dilemmas in psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychotherapy 52 (1):54–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svenaeus, F. 2009. The ethics of self-change: Becoming oneself by way of antidepressants or psychotherapy? Medicine, Health Care, and Philosophy 12 (2):169–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swales, J. M. 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Synofzik, M., and T. E. Schlaepfer. 2008. Stimulating personality: ethical criteria for deep brain stimulation in psychiatric patients and for enhancement purposes. Biotechnology Journal 3 (12):1511–20.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tone, A. 2008. The age of anxiety. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Wardrope, A. 2014. Authenticity and autonomy in deep-brain stimulation. Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (8):563–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warren, O. J., D. R. Leff, T. Athanasiou, C. Kennard, and A. Darzi. 2009. The neurocognitive enhancement of surgeons: an ethical perspective. Journal of Surgical Research 152 (1):167–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Witt, K., J. Kuhn, L. Timmermann, M. Zurowski, and C. Woopen. 2013. Deep brain stimulation and the search for identity. Neuroethics 6 (3):499–511.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, K. B. 2006. Researching internet-based populations: advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages and websurvey services. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 10 (3):00–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen, R. 2013. The Case for Using Drugs to Enhance Our Relationships (and Our Break-Ups). The Atlantic, January 31. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/01/the-case-for-usingdrugs-to-enhance-our-relationships-and-our-break-ups/272615/
   Google Scholar
• Bond, A. 2010. Depression Drugs Affect Personality. Scientific American, September 1. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/depression-drugs-alter-personality/
   Google Scholar
• Carey, B. 2009. Surgery for Mental Ills Offers Both Hope and Risk. New York Times, November 26. https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/27/health/research/27brain.html
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, R. 2013. A New Focus on Depression. New York Times, December 23. https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/23/a-new-focus-on-depression/
   Google Scholar
• Horgan, J. 2013. Why “Optogenetic” Methods for Manipulating Brains Don't Light Me Up. Scientific American, August 20. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/why-8220-optogenetic-8221-methods-for-manipulating-brains-don-8217-t-light-me-up/
   Google Scholar
• Kelley, J. 2010. Antidepressants: Do They Work or Don't They? Scientific American, March 2. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/antidepressants-do-they-work-or-dont-they/
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, M. 2012. Hey, Let's Not Get Carried Away: Anti-Depressants Really Do Help People. The Atlantic, June 4. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/06/hey-lets-not-get-carried-away-antidepressants-really-do-help-people/257976/
   Google Scholar
• Khazan, O. 2015. A Test that Finds the Perfect Drug? The Atlantic, May 20. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/05/a-test-that-finds-the-perfect-drug/393611/
   Google Scholar
• Kramer, P. 2011. In Defense of Antidepressants. New York Times, July 9. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/10/opinion/sunday/10antidepressants.html
   Google Scholar