Autonomy and coercion in academic "cognitive enhancement" using methylphenidate: Perspectives of key stakeholders Forlini, Cynthia and Racine, Eric 2009, Autonomy and coercion in academic "cognitive enhancement" using methylphenidate: Perspectives of key stakeholders, Neuroethics, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 163-177, doi: 10.1007/s12152-009-9043-y. Attached Files Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads Title Autonomy and coercion in academic "cognitive enhancement" using methylphenidate: Perspectives of key stakeholders Author(s) Forlini, Cynthia orcid.org/0000-0003-3809-8229 Racine, Eric Journal name Neuroethics Volume number 2 Issue number 3 Start page 163 End page 177 Total pages 15 Publisher Springer, Berlin Publication date 2009-11-01 ISSN 1874-5490 1874-5504 Keyword(s) Social Sciences Science & Technology Life Sciences & Biomedicine Ethics Medical Ethics Social Sciences, Biomedical Social Sciences - Other Topics Biomedical Social Sciences Cognitive enhancement Autonomy Neuroethics Public understanding Neuropharmaceuticals PRESCRIPTION STIMULANTS COLLEGE-STUDENTS COSMETIC NEUROLOGY NONMEDICAL USE PREVALENCE SAMPLE MISUSE ABUSE UNDERGRADUATE BIOETHICS Summary There is mounting evidence that methylphenidate (MPH; Ritalin) is being used by healthy college students to improve concentration, alertness, and academic performance. One of the key concerns associated with such use of pharmaceuticals is the degree of freedom individuals have to engage in or abstain from cognitive enhancement (CE). From a pragmatic perspective, careful examination of the ethics of acts and contexts in which they arise includes considering coercion and social pressures to enhance cognition. We were interested in understanding how university students, parents of university students, and healthcare providers viewed autonomy and coercion in CE using MPH. We found that perspectives converged on the belief that CE is a matter of personal and individual choice. Perspectives also converged on the existence of tremendous social pressures to perform and succeed. Parents emphasized personal responsibility and accountability for CE choices, and expressed feelings of worry, sadness and fear about CE. Students emphasized the importance of personal integrity in CE, expressed tolerance for personal choices of others, and highlighted the challenge that CE poses to maintaining one's personal integrity. Healthcare providers emphasized the health consequences of CE. These results illustrate: (1) the importance of understanding how context is viewed in relation to perspectives on autonomous choice; (2) the limitations of individualistic libertarian approaches that do not consider social context; and (3) the ethical implications of public health interventions in a value-laden debate where perspectives diverge. © 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. DOI 10.1007/s12152-009-9043-y Indigenous content off Field of Research 1702 Cognitive Sciences 2201 Applied Ethics 2203 Philosophy HERDC Research category C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30125320 Document type: Journal Article Collections: Faculty of Health School of Medicine Related Links Link Description Connect to published version Go to link with your DU access privileges     Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved. Versions Version Filter Type Wed, 10 Jul 2019, 15:27:58 EST Thu, 11 Jul 2019, 05:02:06 EST Thu, 11 Jul 2019, 06:05:38 EST Tue, 06 Oct 2020, 10:59:44 EST Tue, 06 Oct 2020, 11:01:01 EST Filtered Full Citation counts:   Cited 57 times in TR Web of Science Cited 77 times in Scopus Search Google Scholar Access Statistics: 55 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics Created: Wed, 10 Jul 2019, 15:27:58 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.