2025/07/07 by Elise G. Annett, John R. Shook, James Giordano · 1 voice
Engineering · Medicine · Neuroscience · Psychology · #Engineering #Engineering ethics #Environmental ethics #Ethical issues #Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations #Philosophy #Psychology #Psychotherapist #Science, Research, and Medicine
paper · doi:10.1080/21507740.2025.2519457
openalex publication_date 2025/07/07 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/04
Biotechnological enhancements for military personnel arouse scrutiny, beyond the ethics of experimental research and due care during operational service, to the eventual return to a civilian life. Reversal of enhancements-by withdrawal, extraction, deactivation, modification, destruction, etc.-will be just as experimental and consequential. Super soldiering may not smoothly transition to ordinary habilitation and lifestyle. Complete reversions of dramatic augmentations, such as prosthetics or brain-computer interfacing, could be more damaging to the person than the initial installation. Partial reversions would be just as perplexing, as discharged personnel retain workable technology to prevent disability while other careers next beckon for a suitably empowered individual. Either way, all such biotechnological enhancements must be treated as ethical and social experiments having both positive and negative potential outcomes. Life stages of technologically modified military personnel require special ethical consideration beyond the lifecycle of the technology itself. The post-enhancement veteran is a largely unexplored area, and we propose that these civilian "supra-soldiers" will become a cohort of increasing interest, requiring continued care and ethical support. To that end, we suggest a system of guidelines to ensure ethically sound support for those who serve, and have served, in national defense.