Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > On deciding to have a lobotomy

Research

Associated organisational unit

Electronic data

Links

Text available via DOI:

Keywords

View graph of relations

On deciding to have a lobotomy: either lobotomies were justified or decisions under risk should not always seek to maximise expected utility

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

On deciding to have a lobotomy: either lobotomies were justified or decisions under risk should not always seek to maximise expected utility. / Cooper, Rachel.
In: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, Vol. 17, No. 1, 02.2014, p. 143-154.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Cooper, R 2014, 'On deciding to have a lobotomy: either lobotomies were justified or decisions under risk should not always seek to maximise expected utility', Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 143-154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-013-9519-8

APA

Cooper, R. (2014). On deciding to have a lobotomy: either lobotomies were justified or decisions under risk should not always seek to maximise expected utility. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 17(1), 143-154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-013-9519-8

Vancouver

Cooper R. On deciding to have a lobotomy: either lobotomies were justified or decisions under risk should not always seek to maximise expected utility. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy. 2014 Feb;17(1):143-154. doi: 10.1007/s11019-013-9519-8

Author

Cooper, Rachel. / On deciding to have a lobotomy : either lobotomies were justified or decisions under risk should not always seek to maximise expected utility. In: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy. 2014 ; Vol. 17, No. 1. pp. 143-154.

Bibtex

@article{c35f0f1f21c448779cfef36d5f9dcc2e,
title = "On deciding to have a lobotomy: either lobotomies were justified or decisions under risk should not always seek to maximise expected utility",
abstract = "In the 1940s and 1950s thousands of lobotomies were performed on people with mental disorders. These operations were known to be dangerous, but thought to offer great hope. Nowadays, the lobotomies of the 1940s and 1950s are widely condemned. The consensus is that the practitioners who employed them were, at best, misguided enthusiasts, or, at worst, evil. In this paper I employ standard decision theory to understand and assess shifts in the evaluation of lobotomy. Textbooks of medical decision making generally recommend that decisions under risk are made so as to maximise expected utility (MEU) I show that using this procedure suggests that the 1940s and 1950s practice of psychosurgery was justifiable. In making sense of this finding we have a choice: Either we can accept that psychosurgery was justified, in which case condemnation of the lobotomists is misplaced. Or, we can conclude that the use of formal decision procedures, such as MEU, is problematic.",
keywords = "Decision theory, Lobotomy, Psychosurgery, Risk, Uncertainty",
author = "Rachel Cooper",
note = "The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11019-013-9519-8”.",
year = "2014",
month = feb,
doi = "10.1007/s11019-013-9519-8",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "143--154",
journal = "Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy",
issn = "1386-7423",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - On deciding to have a lobotomy

T2 - either lobotomies were justified or decisions under risk should not always seek to maximise expected utility

AU - Cooper, Rachel

N1 - The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11019-013-9519-8”.

PY - 2014/2

Y1 - 2014/2

N2 - In the 1940s and 1950s thousands of lobotomies were performed on people with mental disorders. These operations were known to be dangerous, but thought to offer great hope. Nowadays, the lobotomies of the 1940s and 1950s are widely condemned. The consensus is that the practitioners who employed them were, at best, misguided enthusiasts, or, at worst, evil. In this paper I employ standard decision theory to understand and assess shifts in the evaluation of lobotomy. Textbooks of medical decision making generally recommend that decisions under risk are made so as to maximise expected utility (MEU) I show that using this procedure suggests that the 1940s and 1950s practice of psychosurgery was justifiable. In making sense of this finding we have a choice: Either we can accept that psychosurgery was justified, in which case condemnation of the lobotomists is misplaced. Or, we can conclude that the use of formal decision procedures, such as MEU, is problematic.

AB - In the 1940s and 1950s thousands of lobotomies were performed on people with mental disorders. These operations were known to be dangerous, but thought to offer great hope. Nowadays, the lobotomies of the 1940s and 1950s are widely condemned. The consensus is that the practitioners who employed them were, at best, misguided enthusiasts, or, at worst, evil. In this paper I employ standard decision theory to understand and assess shifts in the evaluation of lobotomy. Textbooks of medical decision making generally recommend that decisions under risk are made so as to maximise expected utility (MEU) I show that using this procedure suggests that the 1940s and 1950s practice of psychosurgery was justifiable. In making sense of this finding we have a choice: Either we can accept that psychosurgery was justified, in which case condemnation of the lobotomists is misplaced. Or, we can conclude that the use of formal decision procedures, such as MEU, is problematic.

KW - Decision theory

KW - Lobotomy

KW - Psychosurgery

KW - Risk

KW - Uncertainty

U2 - 10.1007/s11019-013-9519-8

DO - 10.1007/s11019-013-9519-8

M3 - Journal article

VL - 17

SP - 143

EP - 154

JO - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy

JF - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy

SN - 1386-7423

IS - 1

ER -