Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

It’s Not Just Counting that Counts: a Reply to Gilbert, Viaña, and Ineichen

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Neuroethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Gilbert et al. argue that discussions of self-related changes in patients undergoing DBS are overblown. They show that there is little evidence that these changes occur frequently and make recommendations for further research. We point out that their framing of the issue, their methodology, and their recommendations do not attend to other important questions about these changes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. All page numbers refer to the version of the Gilbert et al. paper published online at https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-018-9373-8

  2. One of these papers [7] may have been missed because, while it was published online in April 2017, it may not have been added to the databases the authors searched until later.

References

  1. Gilbert, F., J.N.M. Viaña, and C. Ineichen. 2018. Deflating the “DBS causes personality changes” bubble. Neuroethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-018-9373-8.

  2. Haahr, A., M. Kirkevold, E.O.C. Hall, and K. Østergaard. 2010. From miracle to reconciliation: A hermeneutic phenomenological study exploring the experience of living with Parkinson’s disease following deep brain stimulation. International Journal of Nursing Studies 47 (10): 1228–1236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hariz, G.-M., P. Limousin, and K. Hamberg. 2016. “Deep brain stimulation 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): 335–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Maier, F., C.J. Lewis, N. Horstkoetter, C. Eggers, E. Kalbe, M. Maarouf, J. Kuhn, M. Zurowski, E. Moro, C. Woopen, and L. Timmermans. 2013. Patients’ expectations of deep brain stimulation, and subjective perceived outcome related to clinical measures in Parkinson’s disease: A mixed-method approach. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 84 (11): 1273–1281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hariz, G.M., P. Limousin, S. Tisch, M. Jahanshahi, and A. Fjellman-Wiklund. 2011. Patients’ perceptions of life shift after deep brain stimulation for primary dystonia: A qualitative study. Movement Disorders 26 (11): 2101–2106.

  6. Hariz, G.-M., and K. Hamberg. 2014. Perceptions of living with a device-based treatment: An account of patients treated with deep brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease. Neuromodulation 17: 272–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. de Haan, S., E. Reitveld, 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. PLoS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175748.

  8. Baylis, F. 2013. “I am who I am”: On the perceived threat to personal identity from deep brain stimulation. Neuroethics 6 (3): 513–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gilbert, F. 2013. Deep brain stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: Postoperative feeling of self-estrangement, suicide attempt, and impulsive-aggressive behaviors. Neuroethics 6 (3): 473–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kraemer, F. 2013. Authenticity or autonomy? When deep brain stimulation causes a dilemma. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (12): 757–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Guyatt, G., D. Rennie, M.O. Meade, and D.J. Cooke. 2014. Users’ guides to the medical literature: A manual for clinical practice. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Schüpbach, M., M. Gargiulo, M.L. Welter, L. Mallet, C. Béhar, J.L. Houeto, D. Maltête, V. Mesnage, and Y. Agid. 2006. Neurosurgery in Parkinson’s disease: A distressed mind in a repaired body? Neurology 66: 1811–1816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gilbert, F., E. Goddard, J.N.M. Viaña, A. Carter, and M.M. Horne. 2017. I miss being me: The phenomenological effect of DBS. AJOB Neuroscience 8 (2): 96–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cabrera, L.Y., M. Brandt, R. McKenzie, and R. Bluhm. In press. Comparison of philosophical concerns between professionals and the public regarding two psychiatric treatments. AJOB Empirical Bioethics.

  15. Maslen, H., B. Cheeran, J. Pugh, L. Pycroft, S. Boccard, S. Prangnell, et al. 2018. Unexpected complications of novel deep brain stimulation treatments: Ethical issues and clinical recommendations. Neuromodulation 21 (2): 135–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy/Lyman Briggs College, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

    Robyn Bluhm

  2. Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences, College of Human Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

    Laura Y. Cabrera

Authors
  1. Robyn Bluhm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura Y. Cabrera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robyn Bluhm.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bluhm, R., Cabrera, L.Y. It’s Not Just Counting that Counts: a Reply to Gilbert, Viaña, and Ineichen. Neuroethics 14 (Suppl 1), 23–26 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-018-9391-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-018-9391-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation