Search form
  2. Dr Hannah Maslen

Dr Hannah Maslen

Hannah Maslen
Deputy Director

Hannah Maslen is the Deputy Director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics. She works on a wide range of areas in practical ethics and applied philosophy, from neuroethics to philosophy of punishment. Her current research projects include:

• BrainCom, a European Horizon 2020 project developing neuroprosthetics for speech, on which she is a Principal Investigator leading the work package on ‘Ethics, Implants and Society’;

• the Oxford Martin Programme on Collective Responsibility for Infectious Disease, on which she is the Programme Manager; and

• Prof Julian Savulescu’s Wellcome Trust project on the relevance of personal responsibility to healthcare policy and resource allocation.

Previously, Hannah worked as a Research Fellow on the Oxford Martin Programme on Mind and Machine. Here she examined the ethical, legal and social implications of various brain intervention and interface technologies. Technologies covered included non-invasive brain stimulation for enhancement, deep brain stimulation as a treatment for various medical conditions, optogenetics, and virtual reality. She has also worked on philosophy of punishment and sentencing, particularly on the relevance of remorse as a mitigating factor within retributive theories of punishment.
Hannah’s academic background is in philosophy, psychology and law. She is a (non-stipendiary) Junior Research Fellow at New College, and a James Martin Research Fellow at the Oxford Martin School.

You can find more information about her research at: https://hannahmaslen.wordpress.com/.  Email: hannah.maslen@philosophy.ox.ac.uk

Journal Articles

  • Neuroprosthetic Speech: The Ethical Significance of Accuracy, Control and Pragmatics.

    Rainey, S, Maslen, H, Mégevand, P, Arnal, LH, Fourneret, E, Yvert, B
    2019
    |
    Journal article
    |
    Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees
    Neuroprosthetic speech devices are an emerging technology that can offer the possibility of communication to those who are unable to speak. Patients with 'locked in syndrome,' aphasia, or other such pathologies can use covert speech-vividly imagining saying something without actual vocalization-to trigger neural controlled systems capable of synthesizing the speech they would have spoken, but for their impairment.We provide an analysis of the mechanisms and outputs involved in speech mediated by neuroprosthetic devices. This analysis provides a framework for accounting for the ethical significance of accuracy, control, and pragmatic dimensions of prosthesis-mediated speech. We first examine what it means for the output of the device to be accurate, drawing a distinction between technical accuracy on the one hand and semantic accuracy on the other. These are conceptual notions of accuracy.Both technical and semantic accuracy of the device will be necessary (but not yet sufficient) for the user to have sufficient control over the device. Sufficient control is an ethical consideration: we place high value on being able to express ourselves when we want and how we want. Sufficient control of a neural speech prosthesis requires that a speaker can reliably use their speech apparatus as they want to, and can expect their speech to authentically represent them. We draw a distinction between two relevant features which bear on the question of whether the user has sufficient control: voluntariness of the speech and the authenticity of the speech. These can come apart: the user might involuntarily produce an authentic output (perhaps revealing private thoughts) or might voluntarily produce an inauthentic output (e.g., when the output is not semantically accurate). Finally, we consider the role of the interlocutor in interpreting the content and purpose of the communication.These three ethical dimensions raise philosophical questions about the nature of speech, the level of control required for communicative accuracy, and the nature of 'accuracy' with respect to both natural and prosthesis-mediated speech.

  • Responsibility, prudence and health promotion.

    Brown, RCH, Maslen, H, Savulescu, J
    2019
    |
    Journal article
    |
    Journal of public health (Oxford, England)
    This article considers the role of responsibility in public health promotion. Efforts to tackle non-communicable diseases which focus on changing individual behaviour and reducing risk factor exposure sometimes invoke individual responsibility for adopting healthy lifestyles. We provide a critical discussion of this tendency. First, we outline some key distinctions in the philosophical literature on responsibility, and indicate how responsibility is incorporated into health promotion policies in the UK. We argue that the use of some forms of responsibility in health promotion is inappropriate. We present an alternative approach to understanding how individuals can 'take responsibility' for their health, based on the concept of prudence (i.e. acting in one's interests). In this discussion, we do not prescribe or proscribe specific health promotion policies. Rather, we encourage public health professionals to consider how underlying assumptions (in this case, relating to responsibility) can shape health promotion policy, and how alternative framings (such as a shift from encouraging individual responsibility to facilitating prudence) may justify different kinds of action, for instance, shaping environments to make healthy behaviours easier, rather than using education as a tool to encourage responsible behaviour.

  • Against Moral Responsibilisation of Health: Prudential Responsibility and Health Promotion.

    Brown, RCH, Maslen, H, Savulescu, J
    2019
    |
    Journal article
    |
    Public health ethics
    In this article, we outline a novel approach to understanding the role of responsibility in health promotion. Efforts to tackle chronic disease have led to an emphasis on personal responsibility and the identification of ways in which people can 'take responsibility' for their health by avoiding risk factors such as smoking and over-eating. We argue that the extent to which agents can be considered responsible for their health-related behaviour is limited, and as such, state health promotion which assumes certain forms of moral responsibility should (in general) be avoided. This indicates that some approaches to health promotion ought not to be employed. We suggest, however, that another form of responsibility might be more appropriately identified. This is based on the claim that agents (in general) have prudential reasons to maintain their health, in order to pursue those things which make their lives go well-i.e. that maintenance of a certain level of health is (all-things-considered) rational for many agents, given their pleasures and plans. On this basis, we propose that agents have a self-regarding prudential responsibility to maintain their health. We outline the implications of a prudential responsibility approach to health promotion.

  • Praiseworthiness and Motivational Enhancement: “No Pain, no Praise?”

    MASLEN, H, SAVULESCU, JULIAN, Hunt, C
    2019
    |
    Journal article
    |
    Australasian Journal of Philosophy

  • The Human Brain Project: Responsible Brain Research for the Benefit of Society.

    Salles, A, Bjaalie, JG, Evers, K, Farisco, M, Fothergill, BT, Guerrero, M, Maslen, H, Muller, J, Prescott, T, Stahl, BC, Walter, H, Zilles, K
    ,
    et al
    2019
    |
    Journal article
    |
    Neuron
    Recognizing that its research may raise various ethical, social, and philosophical issues, the HBP has made the identification, examination, and management of those issues a top priority. The Ethics and Society subproject is part of the core research project.
    Brain, European Union, Humans, Neurosciences, Social Responsibility

  • When Should the Police Investigate Cases of Non-recent Child Sexual Abuse?

    Maslen, H, Paine, C
    2019
    |
    Journal article
    |
    Criminal Justice Ethics
    © 2019, © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Non-recent child sexual abuse (CSA) and child sexual exploitation (CSE) have received recent attention. Victims often do not report their ordeal at the time the incident occurred, and it is increasingly common for agencies to refer concerns to the police years, or decades, after the event. The combination of the non-recent nature of the offence, the lack of engagement by the (potentially vulnerable) victim, and the huge resource burden of investigation make deciding whether to proceed with investigation complex and ethically challenging. Although there will always be a presumption in favor of investigation, for some cases the reasons against investigating will outweigh this presumption. We examine the considerations at stake in making a decision about whether to make contact with the victim and proceed with investigating a particular non-recent CSA case. Arguing for a “broad rights” approach, we identify considerations relating to (1) the victim, (2) criminal justice and crime prevention, (3) limited resources, and (4) legitimacy. We argue that, all other things being equal, non-recent and current investigations are equally worthy of investigation. We assess the implications of suspects being persons of public prominence. We outline a principled decision-making framework to aid investigators. The Oxford CSA Framework has the potential to reduce unnecessary demand on police resources.

  • Evidence-Based Neuroethics, Deep Brain Stimulation and Personality - Deflating, But Not Bursting, The Bubble

    PUGH, J, PYCROFT, L, MASLEN, H, AZIZ, T, SAVULESCU, J
    2018
    |
    Journal article
    |
    Neuroethics

  • Influenza Vaccination Strategies Should Target Children.

    Bambery, B, Douglas, T, Selgelid, MJ, Maslen, H, Giubilini, A, Pollard, AJ, Savulescu, J
    2018
    |
    Journal article
    |
    Public health ethics
    Strategies to increase influenza vaccination rates have typically targeted healthcare professionals (HCPs) and individuals in various high-risk groups such as the elderly. We argue that they should (instead or as well) focus on increasing vaccination rates in children. Because children suffer higher influenza incidence rates than any other demographic group, and are major drivers of seasonal influenza epidemics, we argue that influenza vaccination strategies that serve to increase uptake rates in children are likely to be more effective in reducing influenza-related morbidity and mortality than those targeting HCPs or the elderly. This is true even though influenza-related morbidity and mortality amongst children are low, except in the very young. Further, we argue that there are no decisive reasons to suppose that children-focused strategies are less ethically acceptable than elderly or HCP-focused strategies.

  • Quarantine, isolation and the duty of easy rescue in public health.

    Giubilini, A, Douglas, T, Maslen, H, Savulescu, J
    2018
    |
    Journal article
    |
    Developing world bioethics
    We address the issue of whether, why and under what conditions, quarantine and isolation are morally justified, with a particular focus on measures implemented in the developing world. We argue that the benefits of quarantine and isolation justify some level of coercion or compulsion by the state, but that the state should be able to provide the strongest justification possible for implementing such measures. While a constrained form of consequentialism might provide a justification for such public health interventions, we argue that a stronger justification is provided by a principle of State Enforced Easy Rescue: a state may permissibly compel individuals to engage in activities that entail a small cost to them but a large benefit to others, because individuals have a moral duty of easy rescue to engage in those activities. The principle of State Enforced Easy Rescue gives rise to an Obligation Enforcement Requirement: the state should create the conditions such that submitting to coercive or compulsive measures becomes a fundamental moral duty of individuals, i.e. a duty of easy rescue. When the state can create such conditions, it has the strongest justification possible for implementing coercive or compulsive measures, because individuals have a moral duty to temporarily relinquish the rights that such measures would infringe. Our argument has significant implications for how public health emergencies in the developing world should be tackled. Where isolation and quarantine measures are necessary, states or the international community have a moral obligation to provide certain benefits to those quarantined or isolated.
    Humans, Emergencies, Public Health, Quarantine, Government, Developing Countries, Coercion, Government Regulation, Health Policy, Ethical Theory, Moral Obligations

  • Rationing elective surgery for smokers and obese patients: responsibility or prognosis?

    Pillutla, V, Maslen, H, Savulescu, J
    2018
    |
    Journal article
    |
    BMC Med Ethics
    BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom (UK), a number of National Health Service (NHS) Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCG) have proposed controversial measures to restrict elective surgery for patients who either smoke or are obese. Whilst the nature of these measures varies between NHS authorities, typically, patients above a certain Body Mass Index (BMI) and smokers are required to lose weight and quit smoking prior to being considered eligible for elective surgery. Patients will be supported and monitored throughout this mandatory period to ensure their clinical needs are appropriately met. Controversy regarding such measures has primarily centred on the perceived unfairness of targeting certain health states and lifestyle choices to save public money. Concerns have also been raised in response to rhetoric from certain NHS authorities, which may be taken to imply that such measures punitively hold people responsible for behaviours affecting their health states, or simply for being in a particular health state. MAIN BODY: In this paper, we examine the various elective surgery rationing measures presented by NHS authorities. We argue that, where obesity and smoking have significant implications for elective surgical outcomes, bearing on effectiveness, the rationing of this surgery can be justified on prognostic grounds. It is permissible to aim to maximise the benefit provided by limited resources, especially for interventions that are not urgently required. However, we identify gaps in the empirical evidence needed to conclusively demonstrate these prognostic grounds, particularly for obese patients. Furthermore, we argue that appeals to personal responsibility, both in the prospective and retrospective sense, are insufficient in justifying this particular policy. CONCLUSION: Given the strength of an alternative justification grounded in clinical effectiveness, rhetoric from NHS authorities should avoid explicit statements, which suggest that personal responsibility is the key justificatory basis of proposed rationing measures.
    Clinical thresholds, NHS, Personal responsibility, Rationing, Body Mass Index, Cost Savings, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Dissent and Disputes, Elective Surgical Procedures, Ethics, Medical, Female, Health Behavior, Health Care Rationing, Healthcare Disparities, Humans, Life Style, Male, Obesity, Prognosis, Smokers, Smoking, Smoking Cessation, Social Discrimination, Social Responsibility, State Medicine, Treatment Outcome, United Kingdom, Weight Loss
    • More

Books and Chapters

  • The ethics of virtual reality and telepresence

    Maslen, H, Savulescu, J
    2018
    |
    Chapter
    <p>Present-day biohybrid technologies increasingly allow us to escape the experiential confines of our biological bodies. However, as human agents spend more time in virtual environments, and as the prospects for telepresence become more sophisticated, a number of philosophical and ethical questions arise. This chapter considers a range of examples of virtual reality and telepresence technologies. It examines the value of the virtual experience, asking how virtual experiences contribute to our wellbeing. It asks whether human agents can be authentically “themselves” in virtual environments, and how to understand the relationship between virtual and real acts. It considers the ethical principles governing behavior in virtual environments, addressing how these will or will not differ from the ethical principles governing behavior in non-virtual life. Finally, the chapter addresses the ethical questions raised by the prospect of acting at a distance through telepresence technology, focusing particularly on the moral responsibility of the telepresent agent for her remote acts, and on the harm that might be inflicted on the telepresent agent.</p>

  • Remorse, Penal Theory and Sentencing

    Maslen, H
    2015
    |
    Book
    Whilst the emphasis here is on theoretical justification, the monograph also offers analysis of how normative conclusions would play out in the broader context of sentencing decisions and the guidance intended to structure them.
    Law

  • Penitence and Persistence

    Maslen, H
    2015
    |
    Chapter
    |
    Exploring Sentencing Practice in England and Wales

  • Penitence and Persistence: How Should Sentencing Factors Interact?

    Maslen, H
    2015
    |
    Chapter
    |
    Exploring Sentencing Practice in England and Wales

  • Responsibility Enhancement and the Law of Negligence

    Goold, I, Maslen, H
    2015
    |
    Chapter
    |
    Handbook of Neuroethics

  • With cognitive enhancement comes great responsibility?

    Maslen, H, Santoni de Sio, F, Faber, N
    2015
    |
    Chapter
    |
    Responsible Innovation 2: Concepts, Approaches, and Applications
    © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015. Although drugs that enhance the cognition of ‘healthy’ individuals (e.G. Methylphenidate and modafinil) have received attention from ethicists and philosophers, little research has focused on the concrete opportunities they present for particular groups in society. Recent policy discussion has gone as far as suggesting there may be a moral obligation for individuals in high-risk professions (e.g. Surgeons, pilots) to take enhancers. This chapter outlines a theoretical framework and methodology for investigating the claims that some professionals: (a) might have a responsibility to enhance and (b) might acquire more responsibilities once enhanced. Our methodology is interdisciplinary-as we examine normative hypotheses alongside psychological data and legal precedent-and practice-oriented-as we ultimately aim to make recommendations for policy and the professionals within its remit. Philosophical analysis exposes the conceptual and normative questions involved in a discussion of enhancement in professional contexts, offering and refining definitions of concepts (capacity, responsibility) and theory about their relationship. Psychological inquiry uses surveys and experimental methods to collect data from lay people and professionals on attitudes and responsibility attributions associated with enhancement. Legal analysis examines the conditions under which professional duties to enhance might emerge and how the law might impose or limit liability.
    • More
powered by Oxford Mosaic
List of site pages