Daniel Z. Buchman

Neurobiological narratives: experiences of mood disorder through the lens of neuroimaging

Many scientists, healthcare providers, policymakers and patients are awaiting in anticipation the application of biomedical technologies such as functional neuroimaging for the prediction, diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders. The potential efficacy of such applications is controversial, and functional neuroimaging is not yet routinely used in psychiatric clinics. However, commercial ventures and enthusiastic reporting indicate a pressing need to engage with the social and ethical issues raised by clinical translation. There has been little investigation of how individuals living with mental illness view functional neuroimaging, or of the potential psychological impacts of its clinical use. We conducted 12 semi-structured interviews with adults diagnosed with major depression or bipolar disorder, probing their experiences with mental health care and their perspectives on the prospect of receiving neuroimaging for prediction, diagnosis and planning treatment. The participants discussed the potential role of neuroimages in (i) mitigating stigma; (ii) supporting morally loaded explanations of mental illness due to an imbalance of brain chemistry; (iii) legitimising psychiatric symptoms, which may have previously been de-legitimised since they lacked objective representation, through objective representations of disorder; and (iv) reifying DSM-IV-TR disorder categories and links to identity. We discuss these anticipated outcomes in the context of participant lived experience and attitudes to biologisation of mental illness, and argue for bringing these voices into upstream ethics discussion.

Negotiating the Relationship Between Addiction, Ethics, and Brain Science

Advances in neuroscience are changing how mental health issues such as addiction are understood and addressed as a brain disease. Although a brain disease model legitimizes addiction as a medical condition, it promotes neuro-essentialist thinking and categorical ideas of responsibility and free choice, and undermines the complexity involved in its emergence. We propose a “biopsychosocial systems” model where psychosocial factors complement and interact with neurogenetics. A systems approach addresses the complexity of addiction and approaches free choice and moral responsibility within the biological, lived experience and sociohistorical context of the individual. We examine heroin-assisted treatment as an applied case example within our framework. We conclude with a discussion of the model and its implications for drug policy, research, addiction health care systems and delivery, and treatment of substance use problems.

Stigma and Addiction: Being and Becoming

In his account of clinical neuroscience and subjectivity, Gillett (2009) provides three examples of neurological conditions that dramatically affect the lived experience of the individual: locked in syndrome, persistent vegetative state, and minimally conscious state. Yet for individuals with mental illnesses such as severe addiction, embodied subjectivity may have different implications for human identity. Because attitudes towards individuals with addiction are heavily moralized, being somebody somewhere with an addiction may result in both self- and other-labeling, and consequently, a development of a “spoiled” public identity. Our response will briefly focus on the potential implications of neuroscience and human subjectivity in addiction. Using the so-called “brain disease” model of addiction as an illustrative example, we argue that the development of a stigmatizing identity of an ‘addict’ is gradual, and emerges through a complex process which includes, but is not limited to, the individual’s narrative history, social lived experience, neuro-genetics, and a self-labeling process. Since identity emerges from, in part, and is preserved through relationships, a stigmatizing illness identity considerably affects the being-in-the-world-with-others for “the addict”.

What's trust got to do with it? Revisiting opioid contracts

Prescription opioid abuse (POA) is an escalating clinical and public health problem. Physician worries about iatrogenic addiction and whether patients are ‘drug seeking’, ‘abusing’ and ‘diverting’ prescription opioids exist against a backdrop of professional and legal consequences of prescribing that have created a climate of distrust in chronic pain management. One attempt to circumvent these worries is the use of opioid contracts that outline conditions patients must agree to in order to receive opioids. Opioid contracts have received some scholarly attention, with trust and trustworthiness identified as key values and virtues. However, few articles have provided a critical account of trust and trustworthiness in this context, particularly when there exists disagreement about their role in terms of enhancing or detracting from the patient–physician relationship. This paper argues that opioid contracts represent a misleading appeal to patient–physician trust. Assuming the patient is untrustworthy may wrongfully undermine the credibility of the patients testimony, which may exacerbate certain vulnerabilities of the person in pain. However, misplaced trust in certain patients may render the physician vulnerable to the potential harms of POA. If patients distrust their physician, or feel distrusted by them, this may destabilise the therapeutic relationship and compromise care. A process of epistemic humility may help cultivate mutual patient–physician trust. Epistemic humility is a collaborative effort between physicians and patients that recognises the role of patients’ subjective knowledge in enhancing physicians’ self-understanding of their theoretical and practice frameworks, values and assumptions about the motivations of certain patients who report chronic pain.

In Search of “Anything That Would Help”: Parent Perspectives on Emerging Neurotechnologies

Objective: This qualitative study explores parents’ perceptions about the future clinical translation of neurotechnologies—neuroimaging and genetic testing separately and together—for instrumentalization in the diagnosis and treatment of childhood ADHD. Method: We conducted in-person, semi-structured interviews with parents of minor children diagnosed with ADHD (N = 26) and analyzed 11.75 hr of data using constant comparative analysis. Results: Receptivity to technology and anticipation of potential benefits overshadowed discussion of risks or concerns. Four key areas of potential impact on parent experience are (a) insight and acceptance, (b) treatment and adherence, (c) stigma and blame, and (d) the endeavor to access resources. Conclusion: The findings highlight high receptivity to emerging neurotechnologies for ADHD, key areas for which parents anticipate support from these technologies, and ethics challenges to clinical translation in light of parents’ salient hope and minimal consideration of risk in their pursuit of “anything that would help.”

Neuroimaging in mental health care: voices in translation.

Images of brain function, popularly called “neuroimages,” have become a mainstay of contemporary communication about neuroscience and mental health. Paralleling media coverage of neuroimaging research and the high visibility of clinics selling scans is pressure from sponsors to move basic research about brain function along the translational pathway. Indeed, neuroimaging may offer benefits to mental health care: early or tailored intervention, opportunities for education and planning, and access to resources afforded by objectification of disorder. However, risks of premature technology transfer, such as misinterpretation, misrepresentation, and increased stigmatization, could compromise patient care. The insights of stakeholder groups about neuroimaging for mental health care are a largely untapped resource of information and guidance for translational efforts. We argue that the insights of key stakeholders—including researchers, healthcare providers, patients, and families—have an essential role to play upstream in professional, critical, and ethical discourse surrounding neuroimaging in mental health. Here we integrate previously orthogonal lines of inquiry involving stakeholder research to describe the translational landscape as well as challenges on its horizon.

Investigating Trust, Expertise, and Epistemic Injustice in Chronic Pain

Trust is central to the therapeutic relationship, but the epistemic asymmetries between the expert healthcare provider and the patient make the patient, the trustor, vulnerable to the provider, the trustee. The narratives of pain sufferers provide helpful insights into the experience of pain at the juncture of trust, expert knowledge, and the therapeutic relationship. While stories of pain sufferers having their testimonies dismissed are well documented, pain sufferers continue to experience their testimonies as being epistemically downgraded. This kind of epistemic injustice has received limited treatment in bioethics. In this paper, we examine how a climate of distrust in pain management may facilitate what Fricker calls epistemic injustice. We critically interrogate the processes through which pain sufferers are vulnerable to specific kinds of epistemic injustice, such as testimonial injustice. We also examine how healthcare institutions and practices privilege some kinds of evidence and ways of knowing while excluding certain patient testimonies from epistemic consideration. We argue that providers ought to avoid epistemic injustice in pain management by striving toward epistemic humility. Epistemic humility, as a form of epistemic justice, may be the kind disposition required to correct the harmful prejudices that may arise through testimonial exchange in chronic pain management.

You Present like a Drug Addict: Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Trust and Trustworthiness in Chronic Pain Management

OBJECTIVE Past research has demonstrated that trust is central to an effective therapeutic relationship, but the role of trust in chronic pain management is not well understood. The objective of this study was to provide an in-depth examination of how adults living with chronic pain negotiate trust and demonstrate trustworthiness with clinicians in therapeutic encounters. METHODS This qualitative study focused on adults living in an urban setting in British Columbia, Canada. Semi-structured interviews (N = 27) were conducted with participants with chronic low back pain. The results were triangulated by two feedback groups comprising re-contacted interview participants (n = 4) and physicians with expertise in pain and addiction management (n = 6). RESULTS Grounded theory analysis of the adult patient interviews and feedback groups yielded four major themes: 1) threats to trustworthiness and iatrogenic suffering; 2) communicating the invisible and subjective condition of chronic pain; 3) motive, honesty, and testimony; and 4) stigmatized identities. The following two themes emerged from the analysis of the physician feedback group: 1) challenges of the practice context, and 2) complicated clinical relationships. CONCLUSIONS We found that perceived trustworthiness is important in therapeutic encounters as it helps to negotiate tensions with respect to subjective pain symptoms, addiction, and prescription opioid use. An attitude of epistemic humility may help both clinicians and patients cultivate a trustworthy clinical environment, manage the challenges associated with uncertain testimony, place trust wisely, and promote optimal pain care.

Canadian Guidelines for Controlled Pediatric Donation After Circulatory Determination of Death—summary Report*

Objectives: Create trustworthy, rigorous, national clinical practice guidelines for the practice of pediatric donation after circulatory determination of death in Canada. Methods: We followed a process of clinical practice guideline development based on World Health Organization and Canadian Medical Association methods. This included application of Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. Questions requiring recommendations were generated based on 1) 2006 Canadian donation after circulatory determination of death guidelines (not pediatric specific), 2) a multidisciplinary symposium of national and international pediatric donation after circulatory determination of death leaders, and 3) a scoping review of the pediatric donation after circulatory determination of death literature. Input from these sources drove drafting of actionable questions and Good Practice Statements, as defined by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation group. We performed additional literature reviews for all actionable questions. Evidence was assessed for quality using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation and then formulated into evidence profiles that informed recommendations through the evidence-to-decision framework. Recommendations were revised through consensus among members of seven topic-specific working groups and finalized during meetings of working group leads and the planning committee. External review was provided by pediatric, critical care, and critical care nursing professional societies and patient partners. Results: We generated 63 Good Practice Statements and seven Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation recommendations covering 1) ethics, consent, and withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy, 2) eligibility, 3) withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy practices, 4) ante and postmortem interventions, 5) death determination, 6) neonatal pediatric donation after circulatory determination of death, 7) cardiac and innovative pediatric donation after circulatory determination of death, and 8) implementation. For brevity, 48 Good Practice Statement and truncated justification are included in this summary report. The remaining recommendations, detailed methodology, full Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tables, and expanded justifications are available in the full text report. Conclusions: This process showed that rigorous, transparent clinical practice guideline development is possible in the domain of pediatric deceased donation. Application of these recommendations will increase access to pediatric donation after circulatory determination of death across Canada and may serve as a model for future clinical practice guideline development in deceased donation.

Toward a Lay Descriptive Account of Identity in Addiction Neuroethics

Publisher Summary This chapter discusses how drug consumption and beliefs about morality, identity, responsibility, and self-control are inextricably linked. Recent advances in clarifying the neurobiology of drug dependence and its role in brain function and decisions about drug use and other behavior have reinvigorated academic, practitioner, and policy debates around the impact of addiction on agency, identity, and capacities for choice and control. Clinically, addiction is characterized by a loss of control over drug use as indicated by continued use despite negative consequences. Contemporary addiction neuroscience has been a key recent player in relocating addiction from the social body to the brain. However, even among brain disease supporters, the issue of voluntary control is far from resolved. Neuroessentialist claims about addiction should not be dismissed outright, particularly when there is a paucity of evidence about how addicted individuals actually interpret these new types of classifications. The challenge, then, for neuroethics is to develop a more naturalized account of identity and self in addiction.