REFERENCES
- Goering, S., E. Klein, 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.
- Kraemer, F. 2013. Authenticity or autonomy? When deep brain stimulation causes a dilemma. Journal of Medical Ethics 39(12):757–60.
- Leentjens, A. F., V. Visser-Vandewalle, Y. Temel, and F. R. Verhey. 2004. Manipulation of mental competence: An ethical problem in case of electrical stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus for severe Parkinson's disease. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde 148(28):1394–98.
- 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.
- Merleau-Ponty, M. 2005. Phenomenology of perception. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
- Meynen, G. 2011a. Generalized anxiety disorder and online intelligence: A phenomenological account of why worrying is unhelpful. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 6:7.
- Meynen, G. 2011b. Depression, possibilities, and competence: A phenomenological perspective. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 32(3):181–93.
- Müller, S., H. Walter, and M. Christen. 2014. When benefitting a patient increases the risk for harm for third persons—The case of treating pedophilic Parkinsonian patients with deep brain stimulation. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 37(3):295–303.
- Wheeler, M. 2005. Reconstructing the cognitive world: The next step. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Widdershoven, G., G. Meynen, and D. Denys. 2015. Autonomy in predictive brain implants: The importance of embodiment and dialogue. AJOB Neuroscience 6(4):16–18.