Psycho-Surgery
Daily Observer
Morality—Psychosurgery to |Change
Personality
S.Q.
Lapius seemed to be doodling. Suddenly
he chuckled and looked up from his work.
“Finished,” he exclaimed triumphantly.
“Listen, see if you like it.”
He
stood up and bowed slightly in my direction like a student getting ready to
recite before the class. Then, cocking
his glasses down on his nose, started to read.
“When changing liver, lung or heart
or grafting many another part
It might be said to those who quiz
‘The donor was ---
‘The recipient is ---,’
But moving into new terrain
They’ll soon transplant the human
brain.
Will it be said when this occurs,
‘The donor is ---
‘The recipient was---.’”
Lapius preened. “Do you like it?” he asked.
“It
rhymes,” I said non-commitently. I was
annoyed he because he interrupted my snooze.
“Of
course it rhymes. It’s a poem. But it also raises a serious question. Suppose one were able to transplant a
brain. Would the new person represent
the brain or the body?”
“I’m
sure it will be a problem,” I said closing my eyes and trying to reenter my
dreams. It seemed only a few moments
before Lapius wakened me again.
“Do
you have any opinions on psychosurgery, Harry?”
“Why
the sudden interest?” I dodged the
question.
“Dr.
Irving Cooper asked me to join a panel on the moral issues involved. You know, don’t you, that he has just come up
with a new technique to inhibit intractable epilepsy by the implantation of an
electrical pulsing mechanism over the cerebellum. It works, too. There is one case in particular that struck
me. A young person with seizures and
periodic attacks of violent behavior during which she would commit acts of
mayhem. Actually stabbed several
people. Now she is free of seizures, but
Cooper has been attacked for having deprived her of her essential personality.”
“But
at least she doesn’t have to be institutionalized,” I pointed out.
“True. Until Cooper operated on her she would have
had to be guarded, perhaps jailed.”
“Loss
of some personality traits, some vitality seems a small price to pay for that
freedom to stay out of jail.”
“Yes. But of course the case is extreme. There can be more subtle examples. Certainly psycho-surgery raises important
questions for society to answer. After
all, what is the essential self? Body or
brain. If you answer soul, I’ll ask you
where is it situated. Does meddling with
the brain affect the soul?
“With
some people I should think a hemorrhoidectomy might endanger the so--.”
“Don’t
be frivolous, Harry.”
“Well,
you were throwing away some light lines before--.”
“Just
some levity for my talk, Harry. But I
don’t scoff at the questions being raised.”
“I
think the argument is silly,” I said.
“After all, doesn’t the mental attitude of a person change when a kidney
is transplanted? Until the transplant
the patient might have been sick and depressed.
If the transplant is successful, won’t the mood change?”
“Hopefully
for the better. And of course Cooper
changes patients hopefully for the better too.
And the psychosurgeons who at the sacrifice of some degree of alertness
eliminate hyperactive aggressive activity have, it seems to me, also changed
their patients for the better. But
somehow, when it comes to performing surgery on the brain, particularly those
parts of the brain that affect the ‘mind’ people find excuses to damn it. There are those who say that it deprives the
patient of the freedom to be violent. It
actually becomes a civil rights problem.”
“I
presume you are talking about criminals who would be offered this
operation. Certainly informed consent is
necessary. I don’t think it should be
forced on anybody, but if the prospective patient consents, I don’t see the
difference between ‘mind’ surgery or any other kind of surgery.”
“I’m
quite inclined to agree with you Harry.
It seems that the consensus is that the soul of man and his mind are
inextricably intertwined. But if that is
true, then certainly any condition that adversely affects the mind and mood of
man should be opposed. Why stop with
surgery?”
“Maybe
they see psychosurgery as the first step to creating a population of zombies.”
“Yes. A method of depriving us of our free
will. Consider, Harry, if the method
were improved. They could take newborn
babies, insert a needle sterotactically into the brain. The skull is soft. They wouldn’t even have to operate. Press a button and cauterize a small segment
of some pertinent structure and the child from that moment on would be destined
to behave calmly and with equanimity. Or
the alternative,” Lapius was warming to his subject. “The same needle in another location, and the
youngster might grow to be a raving aggressive untamable individual. A nation might be able to make an army of
these types. Or zap another part of the
brain and the baby might be a romantic, a great lover; or perhaps we could
learn to make musicians, geniuses- shades of Aldous Huxley.”
“Well,
Simon, now that you’ve allowed your imagination to romp, what position do you
take with respect to psychosurgery. Are
you for it or against it?”
“For
it of course. But it must be regulated
like any other technique, to avoid misuse.
On balance, it represents important progress. Actually, if it is used to liberate a person
from fits, agressivity or violent behavior, certainly it encourages free will
and removes obstacles to the expression of free will by the diseased mind. But we have certainly come a long way. We can change a kidney, change a heart. Someday we may be able to change a lung or
even a brain.”
“Is
that the sum of what you are going to say tonight?”
“Yes,”
Lapius said with a twinkle, “unless somebody changes my mind.”