Affiliation:
1. Institute of Scientific Information for Social Sciences, Russian Academy of Sciences;
Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
2. Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Sciences
Abstract
The article discusses the challenges, benefits, and risks that, from a bioethical perspective, arise because of the the development of eHealth projects. The conceptual framework of the research is based on H. Jonas’ principles of the ethics of responsibility and B.G. Yudin’s anthropological ideas on human beings as agents who constantly change their own boundaries in the “zone of phase transitions.” The article focuses on the events taking place in the zone of phase transitions between humans and machines in eHealth. It is shown that for innovative practices related to digitalization and datafication in medicine, it is needed to rethink central bioethical concepts of personal autonomy and informed consent. In particular, the concept of broad or open informed consent is discussed, which allows the idea of moral responsibility in the field of biomedical technologies to be extended to events of uncertain future. The authors draw attention to the problems associated with the emergence of new autonomous subjects/agents (machines with artificial intelligence) in relationship between doctors and patients. The humanization of machines occurring in eHealth is accompanied by a counter trend – the formation of conceptions and practices of the quantified self. There emerges the practices of self-care and bio-power (M. Foucault) caused by the datafication and digitization of personality. The authors conclude that bioethics should proactively develop norms for the evolving interaction between doctor and patients.
Publisher
Humanist Publishing House
Reference27 articles.
1. Abrugar V. (2014) Quantified self: how self-tracking technology can improve your life. Retrieved from https://blog.goalmap.com/en/quantifiedself-how-self-tracking-technology-can-improve-your-life/
2. Anderson M. & Anderson S.L. (Eds.) (2011) Machine Ethics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
3. Barkham P. (2000, June 8) Is the net healthy for doctors? The Guardian. P. 2.
4. Christen M. et al. (2016) On the compatibility of big data driven research and informed consent: the example of the human brain project. In: The Ethics of Biomedical Big Data (pp. 199–218). Cham: Springer,.
5. Cohen G., Vayena E., & Gasser U. (2018) Introduction. In: Big Data, Health Law, and Bioethics (pp. 1–13). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献