• Title/Summary/Keyword: 뇌신경법학

Search Result 2, Processing Time 0.016 seconds

A Study on Legal Regulation of Neural Data and Neuro-rights (뇌신경 데이터의 법적 규율과 뇌신경권에 관한 소고)

  • Yang, Ji Hyun
    • The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
    • /
    • v.21 no.3
    • /
    • pp.145-178
    • /
    • 2020
  • This paper examines discussions surrounding cognitive liberty, neuro-privacy, and mental integrity from the perspective of Neuro-rights. The right to control one's neurological data entails self-determination of collection and usage of one's data, and the right to object to any way such data may be employed to negatively impact oneself. As innovations in neurotechnologies bear benefits and downsides, a novel concept of the neuro-rights has been suggested to protect individual liberty and rights. In Oct. 2020, the Chilean Senate presented the 'Proyecto de ley sobre neuroderechos' to promote the recognition and protection of neuro-rights. This new bill defines all data obtained from the brain as neuronal data and outlaws the commerce of this data. Neurotechnology, especially when paired with big data and artificial intelligence, has the potential to turn one's neurological state into data. The possibility of inferring one's intent, preferences, personality, memory, emotions, and so on, poses harm to individual liberty and rights. However, the collection and use of neural data may outpace legislative innovation in the near future. Legal protection of neural data and the rights of its subject must be established in a comprehensive way, to adapt to the evolving data economy and technical environment.

Neurotechnologies and civil law issues (뇌신경과학 연구 및 기술에 대한 민사법적 대응)

  • SooJeong Kim
    • The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
    • /
    • v.24 no.2
    • /
    • pp.147-196
    • /
    • 2023
  • Advances in brain science have made it possible to stimulate the brain to treat brain disorder or to connect directly between the neuron activity and an external devices. Non-invasive neurotechnologies already exist, but invasive neurotechnologies can provide more precise stimulation or measure brainwaves more precisely. Nowadays deep brain stimulation (DBS) is recognized as an accepted treatment for Parkinson's disease and essential tremor. In addition DBS has shown a certain positive effect in patients with Alzheimer's disease and depression. Brain-computer interfaces (BCI) are in the clinical stage but help patients in vegetative state can communicate or support rehabilitation for nerve-damaged people. The issue is that the people who need these invasive neurotechnologies are those whose capacity to consent is impaired or who are unable to communicate due to disease or nerve damage, while DBS and BCI operations are highly invasive and require informed consent of patients. Especially in areas where neurotechnology is still in clinical trials, the risks are greater and the benefits are uncertain, so more explanation should be provided to let patients make an informed decision. If the patient is under guardianship, the guardian is able to substitute for the patient's consent, if necessary with the authorization of court. If the patient is not under guardianship and the patient's capacity to consent is impaired or he is unable to express the consent, korean healthcare institution tend to rely on the patient's near relative guardian(de facto guardian) to give consent. But the concept of a de facto guardian is not provided by our civil law system. In the long run, it would be more appropriate to provide that a patient's spouse or next of kin may be authorized to give consent for the patient, if he or she is neither under guardianship nor appointed enduring power of attorney. If the patient was not properly informed of the risks involved in the neurosurgery, he or she may be entitled to compensation of intangible damages. If there is a causal relation between the malpractice and the side effects, the patient may also be able to recover damages for those side effects. In addition, both BCI and DBS involve the implantation of electrodes or microchips in the brain, which are controlled by an external devices. Since implantable medical devices are subject to product liability laws, the patient may be able to sue the manufacturer for damages if the defect caused the adverse effects. Recently, Korea's medical device regulation mandated liability insurance system for implantable medical devices to strengthen consumer protection.