Download PDF
Nervenheilkunde 2011; 30(12): 992-996
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1628462
Neuroethik
Schattauer GmbH

Prävention antisozialen Verhaltens bei Kindern

Ethische Implikationen eines neurobiologischen AnsatzesPrevention of antisocial behavior in childrenEthical implications of a neurobiological approach
D. Horstkötter
1   Universität Maastricht, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Abteilung: Health, Ethics and Society, Niederlande und Centre for Society and Genomics, Nijmegen, Niederlande
,
R. Berghmans
1   Universität Maastricht, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Abteilung: Health, Ethics and Society, Niederlande und Centre for Society and Genomics, Nijmegen, Niederlande
,
G. de Wert
1   Universität Maastricht, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Abteilung: Health, Ethics and Society, Niederlande und Centre for Society and Genomics, Nijmegen, Niederlande
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Eingegangen am: 31 June 2011

angenommen am: 24 August 2011

Publication Date:
22 January 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Neurobiologische Erkenntnisse spielen in zunehmenden Maße eine Rolle für die Erklärung der Genese und des Verlaufes antisozialen Verhaltens und damit verbundener psychiatrischer Störungen. Dieser Beitrag untersucht proaktiv ethische Fragen der Anwendung neurobiologischer Ansätze bei der Prävention antisozialen Verhaltens bei Kindern. Die medizinethischen Prinzipien der informierten Einwilligung und des “best interest” liegen dieser Analyse zugrunde. Des Weiteren ist es wichtig, zwischen verschiedenen möglichen Zielgruppen zu differenzieren. Ethisch gesehen macht es einen wichtigen Unterschied, ob es bei Früherkennung und Prävention um asymptomatische Kinder mit einem erhöhten Risiko geht, um die Untertypierung von Kindern mit bestehenden Verhaltensproblemen oder um verhaltensgestörte Kinder deren Eltern einen Kinderpsychiater um Hilfe bitten. Letztendlich ist es von sekundärem Interesse, ob präventive Maßnahmen auf neurobiologischer oder psychologischer Forschung beruhen. Wichtiger ist es festzulegen, an wen sie sich richten und wie mit ihnen umgegangen wird.

Summary

Neurobiological insights are of increasing relevance for the explanation of the causes and the course of antisocial behavior and related mental disorders. This paper pro-actively discusses ethical questions that may arise if neurobiological approaches are applied for the prevention of antisocial behavior. By means of the ethical principles of informed consent and best interest it is investigated who and which interests have to be taken care of. Thereby, it is important to differentiate between different target groups. From an ethical point of view it may make a decisive difference whether early identification and prevention concern a-symptomatic children with an enhanced risk, the (sub)typing of children with relevant behavioral problems or children with a behavioral disorder whose parents consult a child psychiatrist. In the end, it is of secondary interest whether preventive measures are based on neurobiological or social and psychological research. It is more important to determine at whom they target and how they are dealt with.

Schlüsselwörter

Ethik - antisoziales Verhalten - Prävention - Kinder

Keywords

Ethics - antisocial behavior - prevention - children
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Shirtcliff EA, Vitacco MJ, Graf AR, Gostisha AJ, Merz JL, Zahn-Waxler C. Neurobiology of empathy and callousness: Implications for the development of antisocial behavior. Behavioral Sciences and the Law 2009; 27: 137-71.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Baker LA, Bezdijan S, Raine A. Behavioral genetics: The science of antisocial behavior. In: Farahany NA. Herausgeber. The impact of behavioral sciences on criminal law. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2009: 3-44.
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Fishbein DH. The science, treatment, and prevention of antisocial behaviors. Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute; 2000
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Hodgins S, Viding E, Plodowski A. The neurobiological basis of violence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Dreßing H, Sartorius A, Meyer-Lindenberg A. Welche Bedeutung hat die neurobiologische Forschung für die forensische Psychiatrie?. Forensische Psychiatrie, Psychologie, Kriminologie 2007; 01: 241-8.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Beauchaine TP, Neuhaus E, Brenner SL, Gatzke-Kopp L. Ten good reasons to consider biological processes in prevention and intervention research. Development and Psychopathology 2008; 20: 745-74.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 van Goozen SHM, Fairchild G. How can the study of biological processes help designing new interventions for children with severe antisocial behavior?. Development and Psychopathology 2008; 20: 941-73.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Fishbein DH. How can neurobiological research inform prevention strategies?. In: Fishbein DH. (ed.). The science, treatment, and prevention of antisocial behaviors: Application to the criminal justice system. Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute; 2000
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Sterzer P. Born to be criminal? What to make of early biological risk factors for criminal behavior. American Journal of Psychiatry 2010; 167: 1-3.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Blank RH. Policy implications of the new neuroscience. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2007; 16: 169-80.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Farahany NA. (Hrsg.). The impact of behavioral sciences on criminal law. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2009
  • 12 Illes J. (Hrsg.). Neuroethics: Defining the issues in theory, practice, and policy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2006
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Glannon W. Bioethics and the brain. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Singh I, Rose N. Biomarkers in psychiatry. Nature 2009; 460: 202-7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Skolnick DWeisberg, Keil FC, Goodstein J, Rawson E, Gray JR. The seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2008; 20: 470-7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Moffitt TE. The new look of behavioral genetics in developmental psychopathology: Gene-environment interplay in antisocial behavior. Psychological Bulletin 2005; 131: 533-54.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 McCrory E, De Brito SA, Viding E. Research Review: The neurobiology and genetics of maltreatment and adversity. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 2010; 51: 1079-95.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of bioethics. 6th ed.. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2008
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Farrington DP, Welsh BC. Saving children from a life of crime, Early risk factors and effective interventions. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Centrum voor Criminaliteitspreventie en Veiligheid. Trendsignalement 2010, Ontwikkelingen in maatschappelijke veiligheid. Utrecht, NL. 2010
    PubMedGoogle Scholar