The term body integrity identity disorder (BIID) describes the extremely rare phenomenon of persons who desire the amputation of one or more healthy limbs or who desire a paralysis. Some of these persons mutilate themselves; others ask surgeons for an amputation or for the transection of their spinal cord. Psychologists and physicians explain this phenomenon in quite different ways; but a successful psychotherapeutic or pharmaceutical therapy is not known. Lobbies of persons suffering from BIID explain the desire for amputation in (...) analogy to the desire of transsexuals for surgical sex reassignment. Medical ethicists discuss the controversy about elective amputations of healthy limbs: on the one hand the principle of autonomy is used to deduce the right for body modifications; on the other hand the autonomy of BIID patients is doubted. Neurological results suggest that BIID is a brain disorder producing a disruption of the body image, for which parallels for stroke patients are known. If BIID were a neuropsychological disturbance, which includes missing insight into the illness and a specific lack of autonomy, then amputations would be contraindicated and must be evaluated as bodily injuries of mentally disordered patients. Instead of only curing the symptom, a causal therapy should be developed to integrate the alien limb into the body image. (shrink)

Next SectionThe personal identity problem expresses the worry that due to disrupted psychological continuity, one person’s advance directive could be used to determine the care of a different person. Even ethicists, who strongly question the possibility of the scenario depicted by the proponents of the personal identity problem, often consider it to be a very potent objection to the use of advance directives. Aiming to question this assumption, I, in this paper, discuss the personal identity problem’s relevance to the moral (...) force of advance directives. By putting the personal identity argument in relation to two different normative frameworks, I aim to show that whether or not the personal identity problem is relevant to the moral force of advance directives, and further, in what way it is relevant, depends entirely on what normative reasons we have for respecting advance directives in the first place. (shrink)

The idea that people’s numerical identity may sometimes be discontinuous over time initially appears to provide useful material for defending restrictions on putatively self-harming behaviour in a non-paternalistic manner. According to this line of thinking, sometimes a putatively self-harming act is, in fact, a matter of ‘harm to others’. Yet, in this paper I argue that if we, as we ought to do, take into consideration the non-identity problem, this challenges the notion that the agent at T1 is in fact (...) imposing harm on anyone, even when we accept that he or she is numerically different from the agent at T2. If the life of the agent at T2 is still worth living, the agent is not worse off than he or she would have been in spite of the consequences pertaining to the putatively self-harming act since he or she would otherwise never have come into existence. In this way, the argument I put forward in this paper calls in question the ability of the shifting identity argument to actually justify imposing restrictions on self-harming behaviour. (shrink)

Unter Body Integrity Identity Disorder (BIID) versteht man das sehr seltene Phänomen, dass jemand die Amputation einer oder mehrerer gesunder Gliedmaßen oder die Beibringung einer Querschnittslähmung verlangt. Manche dieser Menschen verstümmeln sich selbst; andere fordern von Chirurgen eine Amputation oder die Durchtrennung des Rückenmarks. Von Psychologen und Psychiatern gibt es unterschiedliche Erklärungsansätze für dieses Phänomen; bisher ist aber keine erfolgreiche psychotherapeutische oder pharmazeutische Therapie bekannt. Betroffenenvertreter erklären den Amputationswunsch in Analogie zu dem Verlangen von Transsexuellen nach chirurgischer Angleichung an ihr (...) Wunschgeschlecht. Unter Medizinethikern ist die Amputation gesunder Gliedmaßen höchst umstritten; einerseits wird aus dem Autonomie-Prinzip das Recht auf Körpermodifikation abgeleitet, andererseits wird angenommen, dass der Amputationswunsch aus innerem Zwang oder Wahn resultiert. Neurologische Befunde legen nahe, dass BIID wahrscheinlich eine hirnorganisch bedingte Störung des Körperbildes ist, vergleichbar mit bestimmten Schlaganfallfolgen. Wenn BIID eine neuropsychologische Störung ist, zu deren Symptomen fehlende Krankheitseinsicht und eine durch inneren Zwang eingeschränkte Fähigkeit zu vernünftigen Entscheidungen gehören, sind die von BIID-Aktivisten und einigen Medizinethikern geforderten Amputationen kontraindiziert und stellen Körperverletzungen an Menschen mit einer neuropsychologischen Störung dar. Statt des Kurierens an einem Symptom sollte eine kausale Therapie entwickelt werden, mit dem Ziel der Integration des als fremd empfundenen Körperteils in das Körperbild. (shrink)

The term body integrity identity disorder (BIID) describes the extremely rare phenomenon of persons who desire the amputation of one or more healthy limbs or who desire a paralysis. Some of these persons mutilate themselves; others ask surgeons for an amputation or for the transection of their spinal cord. Psychologists and physicians explain this phenomenon in quite different ways; but a successful psychotherapeutic or pharmaceutical therapy is not known. Lobbies of persons suffering from BIID explain the desire for amputation in (...) analogy to the desire of transsexuals for surgical sex reassignment. Medical ethicists discuss the controversy about elective amputations of healthy limbs: on the one hand the principle of autonomy is used to deduce the right for body modifications; on the other hand the autonomy of BIID patients is doubted. Neurological results suggest that BIID is a brain disorder producing a disruption of the body image, for which parallels for stroke patients are known. If BIID were a neuropsychological disturbance, which includes missing insight into the illness and a specific lack of autonomy, then amputations would be contraindicated and must be evaluated as bodily injuries of mentally disordered patients. Instead of only curing the symptom, a causal therapy should be developed to integrate the alien limb into the body image. (shrink)

Psychiatric patients may try (or express a desire) to injure themselves in hospital in order to cope with overwhelming emotional pain. Some health care practitioners and patients propose allowing a controlled amount of self-injury to occur in inpatient facilities, so as to prevent escalation of distress. Is this approach an example of professional assistance with harm? Or, is the approach more likely to minimise harm, by ensuring safer self-injury? In this article, I argue that health care practitioners who use harm-minimisation (...) can be considered to be helping physical injury to occur, although they do not encourage the act. I consider why there are compelling reasons to believe that a patient who self-injures is not maximally autonomous in relation to that choice. However, I then move onto argue that allowing a degree of self-injury may enable engagement with psychotherapy (enhancing autonomy) and behavioural change. In these circumstances, allowing injury (with precautions) may not be harm, all things considered. (shrink)