| Abstrakt: |
Recent technological advances in neuroscience offer a novel way for parents to nurture their children: altering brain activation to improve cognitive functions. Parental use and state regulation of cognitive enhancement will inevitably cause tensions between parent, child, and state. These tensions stem from three different but fundamentally related causes, namely minors' incompetency in making decisions about their own welfare, parental autonomy to make decisions about the upbringing of their minor children, and the state's interests in protecting minors' well-being. However, these tensions are not without precedents. The courts have frequently struggled to set the boundary of parental autonomy and to balance parents' rights, children's interests, and state's interests, and have accumulated extensive precedents in various contexts. This article reviews previous US court decisions in select contexts analogous to cognitive enhancement—medical intervention, education, and mandatory vaccination—and analyzes their implications for the use of cognitive enhancement on minors. This article will provide a useful guide for policy makers and researchers to identify and analyze issues regarding cognitive enhancement and to develop sound policies to ensure responsible use of this novel technology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
