human-enhancement-technologies-alarming

The current article comprises a thesis written as a part of the LLM Law and Technology at Tilburg University and aims to focus on the interplay between human enhancement technologies and law.

Introduction

Human enhancement is currently an expanding field of science that challenges our perception of reality and human nature on a daily basis. Human enhancement technologies vary tremendously and how they benefit humans depends on the nature of each particular technology. The significant rise and rapid advancement of human enhancement technologies nowadays, especially artificial organs, poses a new breed of questions and challenges the ethics and morality of our society.

In the recent years the field of artificial limbs and muscles has shifted swiftly from the domain of therapeutic devices to the emerging field of technologies that enhance the natural human body capacity and capabilities. For example, prostheses are designated to help amputees to live better life and interact with the surrounding environment properly. The progress of this particular technology has reached a stage that amputees implanted with cutting-edge prostheses manage to outrun able-bodied runners. Another direction of development of artificial limbs is the bionic devices. Their designation and specifications allow possessors to enjoy better mobility and swiftness and even control them by thoughts. Along with improved specifications to assist amputees and other patients, scientists and researchers have extended the utilization of these technologies to serve healthy individuals as well. Considering human body limitations, the advantages such technologies could provide to healthy adopters have been spotted by variety of scientists, biohackers, military and even major international corporations. The recognition of the advantages of advanced artificial limbs and muscle technologies for able-bodied possessors might trigger more intensive research and further development of diverse models and designs. In general, the production of such devices has evolved these days based on less sophisticated production process, 3D printing and lightweight construction materials. In light of these considerations, potential rise of diverse models available on the market seems technically plausible in future. On the other hand, corporations and military strive for boosting the performance of their personnel. As some national authorities around the world have already analyzed the possibility of enhancement of workers’ performance through human enhancement technologies, significantly increased levels of strength, endurance and mobility of human body might become a game changer in some industries. Boosting weight lifting capacity and muscle capabilities of workers in labor-intensive jobs such as construction might contribute to companies outranking competitors and achieving market leading position. When it comes to military, development of superior soldiers might be achievable through the employment of artificial limbs and muscles. The topic of HET in terms of military utilization has been around for a while and numerous experts and researchers have addressed their views and concerns. The influence of biohackers and individuals devoted to augmenting their bodies, especially in light of Transhumanism, should not be neglected as a drive for acceleration of the research and development in this field as well. In other words, on the grounds of the witnessed technical progress at the domain of artificial limbs and muscles and driven by the demands of major organizations as well as aspirations of individuals an expected expansion of the artificial limbs and muscle technologies market might not be a mere speculation. Taken all together, artificial limbs and muscle technologies at some time in future might become advanced enough to be preferred and employed by many able-bodied possessors. Along with advantages offered and the requests of utilizations by corporations and army, the combination between an increasing number of available and accessible devices and a rising acknowledgement of these technologies as adequate solutions of various ongoing problems might end up in overwhelming strive for employment of such technologies in many aspects of human life. A state of abundant of artificial limbs and muscles might occur in future and this thesis will investigate any indicators in these days such scenario to happen and reinforce the foreseen possibility. The current thesis does not intend to predict the level of probability or a time frame a state of abundance of artificial limbs and muscles to be established.

Furthermore, the adoption and employment of these devices might challenge ethics, morality and law in various aspects. In that perspective the thesis will highlight a few consequences that are considered to affect individuals and society in multiple aspects. One of the undesirable effects is believed to be coercion. If corporations and military appreciate artificial limbs and muscle technologies as a means to achieve their objectives, the personnel might be coerced to be implanted with such devices. Coercive enhancement is considered as one of the most plausible potential harms in terms of increasing employment of human enhancement technologies. That notion is shared by scientists, scholars and ordinary people participating in surveys.[1] Coercion is intensively discussed topic not only within academic world but also in terms of military. In light of these considerations, questions are calling for a thorough discussion based on the present legal framework. Can people be ordered by superior authority to be enhanced with artificial limbs and muscles? To what extent can workers be ordered by their employers to be augmented with such devices? To what extent can soldiers be ordered to be implanted with advanced military designed artificial limbs and muscles?

In this thesis human enhancement technologies and particularly artificial limbs and muscles will be explored and described briefly to make the reader familiar with the genesis of the research question. The second chapter will introduce definitions of human enhancement technologies and artificial organs as well as present the nature of artificial limbs and muscle devices. Next, in the third chapter, coercion as an undesirable effect will be outlined in the terms of possible significant rise of artificial limbs and muscles on the market. The concept of coercion will be described in general and in respect to human enhancement including forms of coercive enhancement. The legal implications of coercive enhancement in terms of artificial limbs and muscle technologies will be considered in two aspects as well – the specific domains of business companies and military. In light of these considerations, only the explicit coercive enhancement will be examined more precisely through its implications regarding the legal relationship between employer and employees and inside military organization. These are specifically picked due to the limited nature of the thesis and with regard to possible employment of human body augmentation in business companies and military. Given the preceding, the research question would be presented in legal perspective aiming to analyze whether coercive enhancement intercepts human rights and to what extent. Among the list of recognized human rights at international and constitutional levels, the thesis will spotlight the right to bodily integrity and investigate to what extent coercive enhancement interferes with it. The right to bodily integrity guarantees person’s corporal inviolability and so any forcible enhancement involving physical intrusion into human body might clash with this right. Chapter four will be devoted to analyzing and evaluating to what degree the coercive enhancement might interfere with the right to bodily integrity in the perspectives of military and employment in business companies. As the implantation of artificial limbs and artificial muscles might include intrusion into human body to a severe degree this comprises an additional reason why the thesis focuses on the possibility for boom of coercive enhancement in future.

Artificial limbs and muscles in light of human enhancement technologies

artificial-limbs-artificial-muscles

Introduction

In the current chapter a brief explanation of the nature of human enhancement and the technologies in its scope it will be provided. Furthermore, among all present known human enhancement technologies this thesis will concentrate on artificial organs. The aim of the present chapter is to explain in short the essence of artificial organs and establish a basic understanding of their multiple applications. Next, this chapter will emphasize on two particular artificial organ technologies, namely the artificial limbs and muscles. Why artificial organs are of importance and particularly the artificial limbs and muscles?

In the last decades, the field of human enhancement technologies is being developed at a phenomenal rate. Increasing number of emerging technologies is being presented to the public including human genetic engineering, neurotechnology, cognitive enhancement and 3D bioprinting. These should be added to the list of existing human enhancement technologies such as PGD, plastic surgery, prostheses, doping, natural organ replacements and artificial body organs. In order to comprehend the designation of each technology, an adequate piece of knowledge about the definition of human enhancement technologies ought to be provided to the reader. In such manner, the human enhancement technologies could be delineated from any other technologies and then introduced their aspects of employment. Furthermore, after presenting the main characteristics of human enhancement technologies, this chapter will aim attention at artificial organs as in the scope of human enhancement technologies. Later on, the field of artificial organs will be exhibited by their principal characteristics. Once the artificial organs are introduced and described briefly, definitions for artificial limbs and muscles will be reviewed as well. As the focus of the paper is the employment of artificial limbs and muscles, this chapter will explain to what extent artificial limbs and muscles are in fact both artificial organs and human enhancement technologies in the same time. In that way, the chapter will connect the artificial limbs and muscles with the broad field of human enhancement technologies. By introducing and describing the nature of human enhancement technologies and the employment of artificial limbs and muscles, the next chapters will elaborate on the foreseen scenarios and probable dangers related to establishing a state of abundance of these technologies on the free market.

human-augmentation

Definition of human enhancement technologies

First and foremost, the term “human enhancement” includes a wide range of practices and for that reason deserves a clarification. Obviously, one key element of the phrase is the human, the species Homo sapiens, as a natural person. However, the term “enhancement” raises variety of questions in different fields of study such as medicine, ethics, philosophy and law.

One definition describes human enhancement as “the application of technology to overcome physical or mental limitations of the body, resulting in the temporary or permanent augmentation of a person’s abilities and features”.[2] According to the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, human enhancement should be understood as “any attempt to temporarily or permanently overcome the current limitations of the human body through natural or artificial means”.[3] Despite the first cited definition looks narrower, the latter comprises the same key elements. Furthermore, human enhancement is explained as a reference to the general application of the convergence of nanotechnology, Biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science (NBIC).[4] Additionally, enhancements are defined as “biomedical interventions that are used to improve human form or functioning beyond what is necessary to restore or sustain health”[5]. Next, another definition of enhancements is provided by Eric T. Juengst as “interventions designed to improve human form or functioning beyond what is necessary to sustain, or restore, good health”.[6] In the article “Coercion in Bioethics”, Jess Hasken refers to human enhancement in a very simplistic but broad sense – “the ability to use technology to change our bodies and minds”.[7] Although some of the provided definitions above state that human enhancement encompasses restoration of impaired human functions to previous or average levels, in the current thesis the focus is put on the employment of human enhancement to “raise function to a level considered to be beyond the norm for humans”.[8] The aforementioned definitions give the impression that human enhancement is an umbrella term. With regard to that, a working definition of human enhancement would be – the ability to alter natural human mental and physical capabilities through variety of means. Human enhancement technologies comprise one kind of means to achieve improvement of human body capacity and capabilities.

Human enhancement technologies are defined as technological interventions to attempt to restore impaired human performance or extend it beyond normal function, thus overcoming the limits of the human body.[9] These include a wide range of technologies increasing human cognitive ability by improving mental capacity or alertness, ones increasing physical ability by improving strength, sensory perception or speed and ones improving our ability to eradicate disease and extend our lifespan. With regard to that, human enhancement technologies are also characterized as “techniques that can be used not simply for treating illness and disability, but also for enhancing human characteristics and capacities”.[10] In his public speech about ethics and human enhancement over a decade ago, Carl Elliot introduces his understanding of human enhancement technologies as “the idea of using medicine, or surgery, or other kinds of medical technology not just to cure or control illnesses but rather to enhance, or improve, human capacities and characteristics”.[11] Taken all together, the cited definitions and descriptions can be summed up as broad range of technologies that are initially developed to serve patients and later on are being upgraded to benefit in superior fashion healthy humans as well. Such conclusion could be reinforced by the existence of outdated human enhancement technologies including ear trumpets, wooden legs and ancient eyeglasses. However, human enhancement technologies are transforming in nature and specifications and due to the ongoing technological progress innovations in that field are emerging significantly. This means that present forms of the mentioned out of date technologies including hearing aids, contact lenses and bionic propulsion limb are providing their possessors almost natural capabilities. Nowadays, the development of human enhancement technologies is focused on improvement of the existing technologies aiming to offer superhuman and beyond natural body capacity and capabilities. On other side, revolutionary gadgets have been recently invented that are truly one of a kind including Google glass, exoskeletons that are still augmenting biology with technology but it is hardly to point a medical designation as a primary one. So, the description of human enhancement technologies should accommodate both types of technologies that enhance natural human capacities. The underlying idea is that a technology that is engineered to interact with and augment human anatomy resulting in enhancing natural body capacity and capabilities should fall into the scope of human enhancement technologies.

Employment of human enhancement technologies by healthy people only makes sense in cases when technologies benefit the receiver to a greater degree compared to his natural capacity and capabilities. For example, optical eyeglasses do fall into the extensive description of human enhancement technologies. However, it is unreasonable a person with proper eyesight to use optical eyeglasses. On the other hand, a person who desires a solid improvement of his strength of his limbs might for replacement of these organs if there is a suitable technology on the market. In contrast to patients who enjoy human enhancement technologies with therapeutic purpose, soon humans might be to be transformed to a certain degree into an upgraded improved human organism, half-machines, half-humans. One reason for that would be that the augmented ones would be more productive, more functional and skillful. Enhancing normal human body capabilities and capacity might become a powerful mean of boosting the profit of business activities, way of conducting wars, etc. The scope of the thesis would be narrowed to human enhancement technologies disparate from therapeutic ones that enhance human body capacity and capabilities through its transformation into a technological packed mechanism that could accommodate superhuman capabilities providing superior abilities to workers and soldiers.

Nowadays human enhancement technologies can be split into two main categories, namely cognitive enhancement and physical enhancement. First, emerging approaches to enhance human cognition include pharmacological cognitive enhancement, cognitive maintenance and restoration, cognitive enhancement of healthy individuals as well as non-pharmacological cognitive enhancement.[12] Second, physical enhancement was initially developed for restoration but in the last years its focus has been moving to extending natural body capabilities of healthy people. Under the term physical enhancement are included technologies in the scope of sensory enhancement, enhancement of mobility and limb function, physiology and tissue engineering, cosmetic enhancement and performance enhancement.[13] In the scope of the current thesis fall only the technologies that benefit human body in enhancement of mobility and limb function as part of the physical enhancement technologies. They are intended to mimic the full functionality of natural human limbs and muscles providing at least the same level of control, energy efficiency, and usability as the natural counterparts.

artificial-organs-image

Definition of artificial organs

By definition, an organ is a specialized structure (e.g. kidney, heart, and limb) in an animal or a human made up of various cells and tissues that can perform some specialized function. Most parts of human body that perform specialized functions in fact can be classified as organs. When these become defective and fail to perform properly, they might be replaced by an artificial organ or a prosthetic device. These devices are usually constructed of natural or synthetic polymeric materials. In order to be employed and integrated into the human body they must exhibit good compatibility with blood and body tissues with they come into contact. Additionally, the artificial device must closely duplicate the function of the natural organ. In practice, these artificial devices are made of metals, ceramics, carbon, natural tissues and synthetic polymers.[14]

Turning to the essence of artificial organs, a definition of the term “artificial organ” should be introduced as well. So, a simple and clear definition of artificial organ is „a replacement for natural organ in the body”.[15] The artificial organ is defined more thoroughly as a “man-made device that is implanted or integrated into a human — interfacing with living tissue — to replace a natural organ”[16]. A medical dictionary describes the term artificial organ as “any tissue, organ, limb, or highly complex biological structure that is partially or completely synthetic in nature, and performs the tasks of the structure it is intended to replace”.[17] Additional comprehensive artificial organ explanation is the following: “a human made device designed to replace, duplicate or augment, functionally or cosmetically a missing, diseased or otherwise incompetent part of the body, either temporarily or permanently and which requires a non-biologic material interface with the living tissue”.[18] In other words, a few characteristics in the quoted definitions are in common including a man-made construction identical to an exact natural human body organ, integration of the device into the human body, interfacing with living tissue and performing tasks to replace the missing or failing natural organ. In fact, the characteristics in common are the criteria to classify a device as an artificial organ.

Conventionally, the artificial organs are divided in four groups: Bone/Joint replacements (e.g. hip, finger, knee), Skin/Soft Tissue Replacements (e.g. muscle, skin), Internal organs (e.g. heart, kidney, liver) and Sensory organs (e.g. eye, ear).[19] Some artificial organs are designed to duplicate the function of natural ones (artificial knee, hip, heart) and other augmenting specific functions (artificial pacemaker). Despite that usually the replaced function is related to life support, this is not always required. Other reasons of construction and implantation of artificial organs include improving the patient’s mobility, ability to interact with the other social members and the quality of life. With regard to the provided division of artificial organs some sound examples of artificial organ devices are the artificial hip, the various types of prosthesis, the artificial kidney, the artificial heart, pacemakers, the cochlear implants and bionic eyes. The listed devices fall into different categories of artificial organs but they all fulfill in common the main characteristics of the artificial organ definitions above.

Taken all together, the listed characteristics place artificial organs at the domain of human enhancement technologies under the category of physical enhancement. The initial purpose of artificial organs is to restore to some extent impaired human performance and enhance it. The other aspect of the designation of human enhancement technologies, namely the extension and improvement of natural human body capabilities and capacity beyond the norm, is also covered by the variety of the modern artificial organs such as artificial limbs and muscles. What is more, these devices do interact with human anatomy and that is how they augment human body to a degree depending on the artificial limb implanted.

Definition of artificial limbs

Artificial limbs are artificially made devices that substitute or replace a natural limb of a person. These mechanical devices are intended to restore a degree of normal function of people missing a body part by replacing the natural limb. Devices that qualify for artificial limbs are the limb prostheses. One medicine dictionary describes prosthesis as “an artificial substitute for a missing part, such as an eye, limb, or tooth, used for functional or cosmetic reasons, or both”[20] The same medicine dictionary refers to artificial limb as “a replacement for a missing limb” which is quite broad in sense.  Limb prostheses are principally divided based on the part of the human body that is replaced into the following groups: below the knee (transtibial), above the knee (transfemoral), below the elbow (transradial) and above the elbow (transhumeral). Moreover, limb prostheses could be distinguished based on more characteristics including the construction material, design technology, functions and designation. The history of employment of prostheses proves that limb prostheses were initially used to restore the normal functionality of impaired human body limbs. It is not a secret that prostheses have been used since the Ancient times and there are many prototypes found from that period of time.[21] Still the prostheses are being employed primarily to replace missing limbs lost through trauma, disease, or congenital conditions. However, due to the rapid development in the last decades, scientists come up with models of prostheses that actually exceed and outmatch the capabilities of natural limbs. In fact, the actual models of artificial limbs greatly vary and differ in construction materials, functions, capabilities and design. For example, the J-shaped, high-performance carbon composite prostheses that Oscar Pistorius was equipped with, indeed, secured him “25% less energy than able-bodied runners to run at the same speed” and ”less vertical motion combined with 30% less mechanical work for lifting the body” which was ruled as advantage over able-bodied opponents by the International Association of Athletics Federations.[22] This single remarkable instance illustrates the ability of modern prostheses not only to restore or duplicate the function of a missing or failing natural limb but also to add superiority to the natural body capacity of the device possessor.

However, not only prostheses are in the scope of artificial limbs technologies. The micro-processor limbs, known as “bionic legs”, are also spotlighted by scientists and military experts as a technology with proven benefits that military amputees could employ. These cutting-edge devices literally transform the lives of the technology possessors and offer them “greater stability and mobility.”[23] What is more, advanced models of bionic limbs are not only designated to serve the military veterans. Many amputees around the world are reported to enjoy the advantages of such progressive devices and some even control them by mind.[24] Although bionic limbs are evolving and resembling to a higher degree their natural counterparts in their form and function, these still have a long way to go before mimicking the full range of motion, control and sensitivity of natural limbs.

Under these circumstances, modern artificial limbs not only fall into the field of artificial organs but they do qualify for human enhancement technologies. Compared to the definitions of human enhancement technologies mentioned above, the designation of artificial limbs nowadays not only serves the amputees and patients but also could provide superior specifications compared to natural human limbs in good condition.

Definition of artificial muscles

The human body naturally consists of numerous soft tissues such as muscles, connective tissues and fatty tissues.[25] Natural muscles provide the precise control of movement of parts of the human body. When it comes to soft tissue replacement devices, the artificial muscle is one significant piece of technology. In that light, artificial muscles attempt to emulate the characteristics of natural muscles and the motion of a particular human organ. One definition of artificial muscle is “a generic term used for materials or devices that can reversibly contract, expand, or rotate within one component due to an external stimulus (such as voltage, current, pressure or temperature).”[26] Additional try to define the artificial muscle results in “any material, or device, whose shape can change in response to a stimulus” which allows a broad range of devices to be labeled as artificial muscles.[27] Similarly to the natural muscle, any artificial muscle is characterized by “its ability to contract in response to a chemical or physical stimulus” which describes any artificial muscle as “a kind of actuator generally defined by analogy with the skeletal muscle”.[28]Although these references are quite technical, the artificial muscle technologies could actually fit into the scope of the artificial organs definitions. When the artificial muscle mechanism is integrated into the human body and substitutes the functions of natural muscles it should be counted as an artificial organ. This conclusion is reinforced by inclusion of artificial muscles in the division of artificial organs introduced by Charles G. Gebelein.[29] Research on artificial muscles capable of mimicking human muscle response is advancing at a phenomenal pace and the new inventions would be probably utilized to interfere with medical devices that need to be implanted or attached to human body such as artificial-muscle-powered-prostheses, artificial diaphragm to help people breathe or just to replace or augment any muscle in the body that is failing. A recent breakthrough in the research and development of artificial muscles was introduced as “inexpensive high-strength polymer fibers used for fishing line and sewing thread can be easily transformed by twist insertion to provide fast, scalable, nonhysteretic, long-life tensile and torsional muscles”.[30] These artificial muscles from fishing line and sewing thread have the abilities to “lift loads over 100 times heavier than can human muscle of the same length and weight, and generate 5.3 kilowatts of mechanical work per kilogram of muscle weight, similar to that produced by a jet engine”.[31] By the integration of such ground-breaking artificial muscles into the human body, patients with malfunctioning natural muscles would benefit and the proper functionality of their body would be restored to some extent. On top of that, integration of artificial muscle with the cited specifications additionally enhances the body capacity and capabilities of healthy possessors of the technology as well. So, artificial muscles would account for human enhancement technologies in certain cases. Namely, when they are integrated into human body and at the same time restore impaired human performance and/or extend it beyond the natural limits of human body. With the progress of biotechnology scientists might manage to invent more advanced artificial limbs that not only attempt to emulate the capabilities of natural muscles but also to provide their possessors superior muscle capabilities compared to non-augmented humans.

coercive-enhancement-of-people

Possible coercive enhancement of people by artificial limbs and muscles

Introduction

In the previous chapter this thesis introduced human enhancement and human enhancement technologies through definitions and outlining the wide range of aspects these indeed cover. In that context, artificial organs were spotlighted and explained briefly as a significant part of the human enhancement technologies these days. Furthermore, in the field of artificial organs artificial limbs and muscles were presented and described in short aiming to establish a basic understanding regarding nature and applications of both technologies. So, the preceding determines further elaboration in this chapter on the foreseen consequences a rapid development these technologies might bring to human life.

In this chapter one scenario related to proliferation of artificial organs and especially artificial limbs and muscle technologies would be exposed. The research and development in the field of human enhancement suggests that in the near future an increasing number of devices that enhance people might be available on the market. Statistics and arguments in this favour will be provided in the next paragraphs in order to reinforce a possibility of an expected establishment of a state of abundance of artificial limbs and muscle technologies. Next, having such possible state of availability of devices on the market and the superior benefits they might provide to the possessors in future will have inevitable consequences for humankind and the agenda of lawmakers. The thesis will make an attempt to outline the foreseeable consequences that are predictable at the moment based on the current level of scientific knowledge and statistics. Human enhancement technologies are true disruptive phenomenon in the fields of medicine, ethics, law and technology. In that context, it is natural that there will be both positive and negative effects of them. In light of that, social coercion is one feasible undesirable consequence that already bothers scientists and policymakers. This chapter will examine how relative and substantiated in fact this concern is and then some examples of expected coercive enhancement across society will be given. The reason to focus on the coercion related to the distribution and accommodation of human enhancement technologies as one crucial consequence will be also clarified and furnished with arguments later on. Finally, the chapter will narrow the scope of coercive enhancement that might arise to the single aspect of people who are ordered by a superior authority to be enhanced. Doing so, the chapter will showcase and describe the foreseeable problem connected with human enhancement technologies and coercion with the aim to further crystallize the legal implications of this feasible effects proliferation of artificial organs and especially artificial limbs and muscles technologies.

Establishing a state of abundance of artificial limbs and muscle technologies

Any expectations for expanding the availability and accessibility of artificial limbs and muscle technologies in future should be first considered in the perspective of expected rise of distribution and application of human enhancement technologies. In the current thesis the term “abundance” should be apprehended as a diversity of devices available on the market providing variety of benefits to a broader scope of potential possessors. This thesis does not intend to predict when exactly a state of abundance might be established in the future. It attempts to substantiate a possibility of such course of events some when in future and to spotlight the factors and indicators for such scenario. In that manner, the current thesis pinpoints several examples of advanced devices in terms of artificial limbs and muscles outlining their designation and advantages. Second, the thesis brings on the table numerous reports by variety of national authorities and adds these to business forecasts. Third, investigating the drives for possible trend of establishing an abundance of models also aims to reinforce an expectation for establishing a state of abundance of artificial limbs and muscle technologies. That is why, before all else the thesis will examine whether a more considerable role of human enhancement technologies in human life is foreseeable.

The progress of converging technologies and human enhancement technologies is not a mere speculation but an ongoing process that has been admitted by politicians, scientists and researchers. The Technology Assessment on Converging Technologies Report, published by Policy Department Economic and Scientific Policy and commissioned by the European Parliament, confirms converging technologies as the new challenge at the moment and expresses belief that could contribute to tremendous changes in the way humans think and even beating death.[32] Additionally, the report elaborates on the expected exponential progress of cognitive technologies due to the computer capacity development. As driving forces for an immense advancement are pointed out the defense and military needs to produce smarter and stronger soldiers, the medical field concerning age slowing, curtailment of death and life extension along with the aspirations of biotechnology enthusiasts and hackers.[33] Later on, the report states that NBIC convergence is “already taking place in the laboratories and research departments of contributing convergent disciplines” and policy makers have spotted the NBIC convergence trend.[34] Next, the so-called American report on NBIC converging technologies, issued by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and Department of Commerce in 2002, concludes that “the new developments will be revolutionary and must be governed by respect for human welfare and dignity”.[35] Although a bit outdated and not necessarily reflecting the views of the United States Government and European Parliament, these comprehensive reports demonstrate that plot of rapid development and progress of converging technologies and human enhancement technologies is feasible and based on the current progress of information technologies, nanotechnology and medicine. On top of that, the fact that in 2003 the Health Council of the Netherlands also issued a report on Human enhancement, where it is confirmed that “during the next decade, new substances and methods for engineering healthy people will probably emerge in a rapid tempo. They vary from cosmetic gene therapy and a new generation of anxiety inhibitors and mood modulators, to psychotropic medication that boosts cognitive abilities (concentration, memory) and a drug that would allow women to optimise their sexual functioning. Billions are being invested in development” also reinforces the anticipated trend of proliferation of human enhancement technologies in the future.[36] Indeed, more than a decade later the cited predictions seem not to have happened on such massive scale but in terms of methods for construction cheaper prostheses and artificial muscles significant progress has been witnessed. This indicates for a greater probability of the outlined in the report course of events sooner to occur. The Human Enhancement and the Future of Work Joint Report by the by the Academy of Medical Sciences, the British Academy, the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Royal Society explores the implications of human enhancement technologies for the future of work which is obviously recognized as a pressing topic due to the admitted “widespread use of enhancements” and the anticipations that “demographic shifts will be accompanied by changes to the nature of work, and both of these transitions will influence the context in which enhancements might be used”.[37] All mentioned reports reiterate that the widespread of human enhancement technologies has been happening for over a decade and indeed second that such trend is predicted to last for a long time and grow in a considerable fashion. Although these reports are not evidence certain probability that in future human enhancement technologies will take over human life for sure they do indicate that the possibility should be considered seriously.

One determinant for a possible proliferation of human enhancement technologies in future is the proactive process of research and development happening across fields of biotechnology, engineering and computing in the last decades. As the population worldwide ages and given the advancement in the other medical technologies over the past few decades, patients will come to expect the same improvements in the human enhancement field as well. With regard to that, devices such as cochlear implants, artificial hip, pacemakers, artificial kidney, and bionic eyes have been serving millions of patients in the last years so scientists and researchers are attempting to upgrade these technologies constantly. Scientists come up with improvements of existing well-known human enhancement technologies such as cosmetic enhancement, reproductive technologies and pharmaceutical means. At the same time, new breakthrough devices and technologies that revolutionize the performance of natural human body are invented. In that scope fall groundbreaking achievements regarding the domains of physical performance enhancing drugs, smart drugs, organ replacements, bionic limbs and implants, reproductive technologies, germline modification, sensory implants, deep brain simulation, nutrition, cosmetic enhancement, etc.

Another substantial factor for an expectation of a state of abundance of human enhancement technologies is the military research and development in that field. As far as military human enhancement projects are concerned, it ought to be highlighted the immanent commitment of researchers to construct cutting-edge military technologies and their efforts to augment natural human capabilities. In his article “Emerging Military Technologies: Balancing Medical Ethics and National Security”, Efthimios Parasidis describes the twenty-first century as “the age of the biomedical military”.[38] His conclusion is based on a statement of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) that “one of its primary goals is to exploit the life sciences to create soldiers with superior physical, physiological, and cognitive abilities”.[39] The article references to projects that include: “(1) developing drugs that can reduce fear, increase aggressiveness, or keep individuals awake and alert for up to seven days straight; (2) genetically engineering the human immune system so that it is able to recognize and adapt to any pathogen; (3) creating implantable electrodes that permit human-to-human and human-to-computer communication via thought alone; and (4) establishing human-to-computer interfaces that are able to detect a person’s neurological state and release neurochemicals that can combat fatigue, enhance mood, suppress or improve memory, or facilitate learning’’.[40] So far, there are numerous HET being developed to advance the performance of soldiers and enhance their battle abilities. For example, the exoskeleton suits, artificial blood, artificial muscles and joints being developed and tested at the moment are anticipated to be put into practice soon.[41] [42] The US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is devoted to support the US army with breakthrough technologies for national security. Some among the human enhancement technologies developed by DARPA could be evaluated not only as tries to design a futuristic super-soldier. Instead, the mentioned military projects and inventions might revolutionize the ordinary human being. It should be no surprise if in the future most of the human enhancement technologies prototypes designed for military purposes actually become available on the market. For example, the exoskeleton suit could be used by both disabled veterans and soldiers on duty. Today exoskeleton technology is developed to help soldiers to carry heavy loads in the battlefield with less efforts. To summarize, the conscious intention to bring military forces on a higher level through means of human enhancement technologies might induce more active research and development in that field resulting in high-tech technologies that could benefit soldiers as well as civilians eventually.

The latest achievements at the human enhancement technologies domain inspire enthusiasts to augment themselves and experiment with their bodies. So, the third drive for substantiation of a possibility of establishment of a state of abundance of human enhancement technologies should be the aspirations and overwhelming enthusiasm of a growing number of people to augment their healthy bodies as well as stakeholders to enhance their employees’ work performance. Many supporters of Transhumanism are willing to augment their bodies and enhance their natural capabilities.[43] The same applies to biohackers who are devoted into cutting-edge technology and eager to experiment with their own body. Especially scientists and wealthy enthusiasts are trying to facilitate different prototypes of futuristic artificial organs in their bodies.[44] [45] What is more, global companies are also looking into the development of human enhancement technologies and their advantages. Not only individuals or groupings of enthusiasts sharing technical passion are attached to the idea of accommodating human enhancement technologies but also major corporations are implementing them into the work process. The exoskeleton technology that was mentioned regarding its military application turns out to be lucrative for multinational corporations as well. This technology is primarily designed for patients with mobility disorders to allow them to walk.[46] Some companies such as Panasonic and Hyundai yet plan to employ exoskeleton technology on a regular basis to serve their factory workers.[47] [48] Among the most useful specifications of the device is the ability to detect the perfect moment automatically when worker is about to lift something heavy and reduce the stress. Besides, Panasonic introduced the Ninja exoskeleton suit prototype that mimics the natural human movement and assists the possessor while walking or running.[49]

The particular example of exoskeleton technology is quite remarkable because outlines how a single human enhancement technology could be accommodated by various types of users and benefit them – patients, soldiers and healthy people.

In brief, the dynamic progress in the field of human enhancement technologies that is triggered by the calling problems and challenges of medicine, the ongoing government-sponsored programs and projects aimed to raise superior human soldiers and the aspirations of biotechnology enthusiasts and companies to accommodate wide range of human enhancement technologies for personal purposes frame a sheer grounds for a prediction for a proliferation of human enhancement technologies in future. Each of the described directions of the human enhancement technologies research and development serves different objectives. Nevertheless, all these in total substantiate a possibility that a state of great amount and supply of human enhancement technologies is plausible to be expected sooner or later. In that context, falling into the scope of human enhancement technologies artificial limbs and muscle devices should be also investigated whether an increase of their availability and accessibility could be expected.

With regard to all abovementioned, it is true that any trends in terms of human enhancement technologies are not a solid argument that the same would apply for substantiation of a possible scenario of growth of artificial limbs and muscles on the market. An analogy regarding the lack of relation between an increasing number of cars sold and the amount of electric vehicles that will be sold in future is to some extent valid. However, investigating the development of cars and the advance of their specifications as well as the evolution of consumers’ needs and desires could prove one possible scenario of rising production of electric vehicles in future. The same applies to self-driving vehicles that just twenty years ago were seen only on the science-fiction movies and were not discussed among scholars or legislators. In that context, the next paragraphs elaborate on recognizing the determinants and indicating factors for outlining a probability of establishing a state of abundance of artificial limbs and muscle technologies in future.

When it comes to artificial limbs, the possibility of abundant technologies gives the impression of plausible one not that far in the future. Although at the moment the cost of quality models of prostheses is usually unaffordable for many patients around the world, a trend of new technologies and materials contributing greatly to tremendous cost-reduction of the prostheses devices has been happening in recent years. Today, the ubiquity of 3D printers and innovations in prosthetic design, manufacturing and distribution, offer a practicable solution for the large number of people living with limb loss globally. This technology is being improved at a phenomenal rate and nowadays an increasing number of patients could benefit from variety of 3D-printed prostheses.[50] During the last five years many successful stories of disabled patients, worldwide equipped with inexpensive 3D printed prostheses, were introduced to the public.[51] Open-source initiatives allow everyone to customize a 3D model of a prosthetic hand and then to print it on own 3D printer.[52]
Other complementing technologies such as 3D scanning and body modeling technologies enable 3D scan their own limbs and have prosthetics modeled after them eventually.[53] The rising compatibility of 3D printers with new materials like lightweight titanium would provide more durable and strong 3D printed prostheses. Despite its flourishing popularity and endorsement among patients, scientists and business, 3D printing is not the only technology that might significantly add to abundance of artificial limbs devices in future. The implementation of special biomaterials such as pre-impregnated carbon fibers, polyurethane and PE foams attempt to answer the demanding of prostheses providing patients with comfort, biocompatibility, high performance and versatility.
The military research and development of artificial limbs for the needs of disabled veterans and soldiers on active duty reinforce the trend of improvement of the artificial limbs technologies. With regard to DARPA priority to maintain and enhance greatly the abilities of the warfighters, it has already developed, to a certain point, advanced prostheses (featuring mind-controlled limbs).[54] Some quadriplegic volunteers had their brain surface implanted with small array “to pick up these neural signals for motor control, and then to use those to control these new, very sophisticated, robotic, prosthetic arms”.[55] DARPA introduced a new prosthetic technology that provides the patient with an almost natural sense of touch. In fact, a young man who has been paralyzed for more than a decade has become able to “feel physical sensations through a prosthetic hand directly connected to his brain, and even identify which mechanical finger is being gently touched”.[56] Seems that there is an ample room for improvement, supported by the proven benefits of the technology and increasing demand by patients, might guarantee constant progress and bright future for these mechanical devices.

It is no secret that production of artificial limbs is a multimillion-dollar industry that cares for its clients and aims to expand its range of customers. In that context, market analysists around the world issue global projections for the artificial limbs and joints market. According to the “Artificial Limbs and Joints Market Size, Application Analysis, Regional Outlook, Competitive Strategies and Forecasts, 2014 to 2020” report “increasing geriatric population and growing obese population are amongst key factors attributing to the growth of the artificial joints market”.[57] The conclusion of this report is that “on the basis of technology the market is segmented into digital and manual limbs. Digital limbs are expected to grow at a lucrative rate over the forecast period owing to advantages associated with it”.[58] Another comprehensive market report, entitled “Orthopedic Prosthetics Market – Global Industry Analysis, Size, Share, Growth, Trends and Forecast 2015 – 2023”, informs that “the increasing number of old age population and growing trauma cases all over the world are creating the high rise in demand for orthopedic prosthetic products” meaning that “these facts represents the massive demand for the orthopedic prosthetic products globally and the increasing trend of the requirement in coming future. The technological advancements in orthopedic prostheses in terms of better fixation, wear-resistant material and cement less design along with this suitable reimbursement circumstances and increasing number of trained healthcare professionals are driving the growth of the market”.[59] Next market report points at market growth drives being the “aging global population, rising diagnoses of degenerative joint diseases and a patients’ willingness to pursue a more active lifestyle”.[60] Why the mentioned market reports substantiate a possibility of establishing a state of abundance of artificial limbs could be answered as follows: reports in question mark some distinct market drives that are believed to push the research and development of advanced artificial limbs devices forward and the predicted demand for different types of artificial limbs might result in variety of models.

Turning to the field of artificial muscle technologies, predictions for the artificial limbs market still apply to some extent. In fact, cutting-edge artificial limbs require advanced artificial muscle technologies. In other words, the dynamic investigation into new designs of artificial limbs might provoke proactive development of artificial muscles as well. Next drive for improvement of artificial muscle technologies is the field of robotics where the primary applications include humanoids and powered exoskeletons. One crucial part of human body is muscles that let people move and walk. Despite intensive research and development of artificial muscles for the purposes of robotics these might still not be advanced as biological muscles but eventually a breakthrough in this field will benefit the replacement of biological human muscles with enhanced artificial ones.[61] The artificial muscles, for either robotics or human medical applications, need to be flexible and strong enough to replicate their natural counterparts. Such breakthrough invention was already introduced as “inexpensive high-strength polymer fibers used for fishing line and sewing thread can be easily transformed by twist insertion to provide fast, scalable, nonhysteretic, long-life tensile and torsional muscles”.[62] Strong and flexible artificial muscles, constructed of light-weight and affordable materials that are suitable to be implanted into human body, are a goal of scientists and researchers around the world.[63] Once inexpensive materials are adopted and used on a large scale for the construction of artificial muscles the possibility of increased amount of models might not seem unimaginable.

Consequences of abundant availability of artificial limbs and muscles

Based on the introduced statistics, facts and market conditions one forecast is that a state of abundance of artificial limbs and muscle technologies is plausible and the market of such devices might expand greatly sooner or later. Under these circumstances, diverse consequences might be expected as aftermath of the increased accessibility and diversity of models. As human enhancement relates to enhancement of individuals and their performance in society, the phenomenon of abundant artificial limb and muscle technologies should be examined in the perspective of society as well. In that context, the effects of the consequences of abundant availability of artificial limbs and muscles might be on two main levels: towards individuals and towards society. Next evaluation of the effects would be based on whether the technologies in question provide benefits or risks. Like almost every piece of technology these days there are not merely positive or negative effects upon adoption. So, existence of a great amount of artificial limbs and muscle technologies would probably result in contrasting effects.

When it comes to the consequences of a possible proliferation of artificial limbs and muscle technologies, the list of positives hints at a few. The first and foremost expectation is the cost of artificial limbs and muscles to decrease due to the greater supply of such technologies. The indirect consequence of that availability would be the increasing number of customers that would be able to obtain a device in the scope of artificial limbs and muscles. Based on such accessibility the positives for individuals would vary significantly. Both aspects of utilization of artificial limbs and muscles, namely for restoration of bodily functions and enhancement of capabilities of healthy people, are tightly connected with the primary designation of artificial limbs and muscle technologies. Soldiers will employ artificial limbs and muscles that improve their performance during warfare, professions that require immense bodily strength and endurance will be supplemented by the extraordinary capabilities artificial limbs and muscle technologies, sportsmen will be augmented to enhance their sports records and probably establish tournaments for augmented only. There might be collateral positive consequences in other fields such as robotics, space travelling by astronauts, etc. Additionally, unexpected benefits might be witnessed as well. The second consequence that might result from a proliferation of artificial limbs and muscle technologies is the supply of a wide range advanced models on the market. In such a case the main benefits for individuals will be related to the opportunity to obtain cutting-edge human enhancement technology on a competitive price that satisfies their specific needs and preferences. In other words, the segmentation of the market that might occur will benefit the customers with specific requirements and preferences. Under these circumstances, a broader employment of artificial limbs and muscle technologies might be projected. To conclude, the two main consequences that are foreseen based on establishing a state of abundance of artificial limbs and muscle devices might deliver considerable advantages to a broader scope of technology adopters. Correspondingly, an expanding degree of individual enhancement will influence society and trigger social implications.

As far as social benefits are concerned, any projected growing trend of enhancement by individuals with artificial limbs and muscles might carry out some social implications. Improved individual performance of workers might increase the productivity of communities and even further promote the GDP of countries. By augmenting their bodies healthy individuals might contribute to greater public achievements in the terms of economics, sports, demography, science, space travelling because they will accommodate extraordinary body capacity and capabilities.

The damaging social effects in the fields of ethics, morality and fairness that are usually predicted related to human enhancement to some extent also apply in the particular terms of artificial limbs and muscles. Reducing costs and greater supply of various models might trigger problems with respect to inequality, undesirable cultural change, undesired substitution of the human spirit, dramatic change in the conduct of war and social coercion.[64] All mentioned could be examined on both individual and social levels as these expected issues comprise undesirable effects of the direct consequences in case of abundant market of artificial limbs and muscle technologies.

In the context of human enhancement technologies undesirable cultural change is another expected negative effect worth to be elaborated on. Elements of undesirable cultural change could comprise normalisation, medicalisation and alteration of our perception of humanity.[65]

Enhancement with artificial limbs and muscles at some point in future might have an effect of standardization. That would be the case if augmentation is found on the need to comply with a specific dominant norm meaning reinforcement of the validity of that norm. The social pluriformity could be at stake if the normalisation norm is defined by the dominance of enhancement and the opponents of self-augmentation are put under social pressure due to refusing to keep up with the new social norm. In this case the normalisation in question would express another form of stereotypes and prejudices with the possibility to result in extreme forms such as discrimination and eventually apartheid.[66] In the broad scope of existing human enhancement technologies a striking example is the evolving understanding of beauty based on the progress of cosmetic enhancement through plastic surgeries, pharmaceutical means and other interventions. In the last years, the social norms in the terms of beauty and aesthetic appearance have changed significantly due to the proliferation of cosmetic enhancements and the development in this field resulting in abundance of affordable technologies such as Botox, etc. In such a context, the reported trend of electing limb prostheses as means of self-expression for patients with upper-limb loss is an identical mirror trend.[67] However, with regard to artificial limbs and muscles it is not only about the aesthetic norms through society but also the functional advantages they could offer. When it comes to human enhancement as a practice of improving human body capacity and capabilities beyond the natural degrees, the dominant norm could become the enhancement of natural human body. In terms of artificial limbs and muscles, that would mean more people attempting to obtain and utilize these technologies with aspirations to comply with the dominant social norm set by the increasing number of augmented humans. In the beginning, an abundance of artificial limb and muscle technologies might primarily serve amputees and patients. In time, in accordance with the development of the technologies and benefits they offer, more people might strive to augment themselves to improve their natural limbs and muscles capabilities. At this time, the trend might be ongoing and when an exponential growth of employment of artificial limb and muscles flourishes the dominant norm might be established. In respect to a state of abundant models on the artificial limbs and muscles market this dominant norm might transform into a standard that could disrupt the social perception of human nature. Such scenario paves the way for social coercion.

Any abundance of artificial limbs and muscles that are easily obtainable and accessible might in fact end up in medicalization. That means extreme accommodation of augmentation in ways offering solutions to problems that are usually handled in non-medical ways. [68] In other words, medicalization might become the first option for resolving simple issues even in mundane and trivial cases. Although probably legitimate in the perspective of an individual case, the social impact might be harmful and undesirable. The risk in relation to the medicalization phenomenon might contribute to diminishing of natural human feelings and emotions regarding adopting the easy enhancement solutions. This is one aspect of the replacement of authentic human nature that human enhancement technologies are suspected of. Physical substitution of natural limbs and muscles might evolve into an effortless way to bypass trivial issues or obstacles that in the past were solved by consistency and tremendous efforts. For example, young athletics, not willing to improve their sport achievements through exhausting and intensive trainings and exercises taking years, preferring implantation of cutting-edge artificial limbs or muscles securing them considerable advance or at least equal capabilities as the leading athletes. On social level, the trend of medicalization might be adopted and encouraged for the sake of promoting prosperity of nations and communities. For instance, companies might stimulate with special bonuses or lucrative contract clauses their employees to augment their bodies to be more productive. The problem with such course of events could be explained again with possible social coercion in terms of abuse of medical interventions and bodily intrusions.

Furthermore, it is believed that enhancement alternates the perception of humans for humans. This is considered to be true especially if an understanding of overinstrumentalisation of the human body is adopted, reinforcing the idea that its appearance and functionality is more important than mentality and human spirit.[69] In light of artificial limbs and muscles, the mechanical perception of human body is fully suitable in respect to that natural limbs are the instruments of the human body to interact with the surrounding environment and move within it. With regard to that, the augmentation of human body with artificial limbs and muscles indeed transforms the human into a superior instrument to achieve objectives that are unthinkable or barely achievable through natural human body capacity and capabilities. That would make it quite lucrative to look at human body as a piece of hardware that can be upgraded to boost its performance for better productivity. To put it more simply, the risk of overinstrumentalisation effect based on abundance of artificial limb and muscle technologies on the market lays on the basis of intended metamorphosis of the natural human body into an advanced posthuman mechanism. How is that possible? First, in the terms of military, soldiers are contemplated as the means to achieve the target. The human units on the battlefield are instruments to win the battle. In light of these considerations, the military developments of artificial limbs and muscles might turn soldiers into almost robots and replacing body parts with various devices clashes with the law of war as the Geneva Conventions prescribe. Such plot perfectly covers the foreseen undesirable scenario of neglecting human values in comparison to mere mechanical functionality and utilization for achieving greater goals. Workers are also at stake to be apprehended even more like half-machines, half-humans, rather than human persons in connection with the employment of advanced artificial limbs and muscles that enhance their work abilities. In other words, at some time overinstrumentalisation of human body might be developed as a prevalent tendency having its roots in the ongoing strive for profits maximization. A tendency in that matter would bother the fields of morality and ethics in terms of the human spirituality.

The tendencies of normalization, medicalization and instrumentalisation are closely connected with another predicted undesirable effect that might be witnessed within a state of wide range of artificial limb and muscle models. In fact, these trends might trigger coercion across society related to the adoption of human enhancement technologies.

Coercion as a feasible undesirable consequence

Given the preceding, coercion across society seems like a feasible outcome based on rising of normalisation, medicalization and overinstrumentalisation of human body in the terms of enhancement with artificial limbs and muscles. In this context, the coercion might be defined as a collateral effect based on the increasing number of acknowledged advantages artificial limbs and muscle technologies offer and their growing accessibility. But what is meant by coercion? How does coercion relate to the social understanding and utilization of artificial limbs and muscles?

Coercion is a quite philosophical term like truth, good, fairness, equality and so might be very slippery to attempt to define it. What is more, some scholars believe it has a divisive nature and in that context Martin Gunderson described coercion like „a necessary evil”.[70]

A long time ago, notorious philosophers such as Kant, Lock and Hobbes have established tree criteria for coercion, namely the following: if a relationship between two people exists; if the coercer acts coercive towards the corcee; if the coercee takes action in response of the coerceer’s act. The second mentioned criterion is the aspect that is considered as evil one.[71] An explanation of that is because „coercion is typically thought to carry with it several important implications, including that it diminishes the targeted agent’s freedom and responsibility, and that it is a (pro tanto) wrong and/or violation of right.[72] When it comes to the field of bioethics, the Bioconservatives and Transhumanists argue on the definition of coercion but both groups see it as evil based on different reasoning.

Sometimes the term “coercion” is used in quite broad sense to describe social pressures or the manipulative effects of advertising, one’s upbringing, or the structuring of society more generally. In other cases it is treated as a general concept that encompasses a variety of examples of interpersonal infringement on one’s rights.[73] In the 20th century, philosophers and legal theorists ended up with a more explicit definition of “coercion” and the way it relates to other ideas. Their view on coercion connected it tightly with “the use of force or violence, as well as to threats of the same”.[74] In his essay “Coercion” Robert Nozick established a framework for understanding coercion. Nozick’s invention differs from the traditional idea of coercion as it associates coercion “only with proposals and excludes direct uses of force or violence as the same time it insists that coercion takes place only when the coercee acquiesces to it; and it makes coercion explicitly dependent on the coercee’s choice to take or not take a specific action A, and mandates that a judgment about coercion must refer to facts about the coercee’s psychology, such as her assessment of the consequences A-ing in light of the coercer’s proposal”.[75] In order to identify acts of coercion, Alan Wertheimer introduces „two-pronged test for whether or not a proposal constitutes a coercive threat”.[76] The first test actually consist of the outcome whether there is an indication by the coercer if his proposal is refused will the coercee be put in worse position than ought to be in. Because Wertheimer believes that “only threats coerce, but not all threats do” he poses a second requirement. It states that the „choice forced upon the coercee be such that the latter has no reasonable choice but consent”.[77]

Examples of coercive enhancement across society

In his article “Regulating Human Biological Enhancements: Questionable Justifications and International Complications” Henry T. Greely divide the coercive enhancement into three categories, namely frank, parental and implicit, based on the current development and state of human enhancement technologies. [78]

Frank coercion could be described as direct or explicit coercion. That particular form of coercive enhancement is considered to be the most despotic in the sense of the relationship between coercer and coercee. Frank coercive enhancement could comprise practices such as mandatory training sessions or physical training for employees in comparison to any coercive intentional physical intrusions into the human body or other non-invasive enhancement practices that enhance the coercee. As in very specific and isolated cases mandatory treatment and invasion of human’s body is legally prescribed, generally competent adults have the almost absolute right to refuse medical treatment. In light of these considerations, frank coercion usually needs to be regulated appropriately because of its intrusive nature.[79] In light of Alan Wertheimer’s understanding of coercion, the explicit coercive enhancement involves a wrongful threat towards the coercee from the coercer when coercee’s denial will most probably end up in worse off based on a subordinate connection between both. In other words, this could be explained as the most severe form of coercion as to greatest extent forces the coercee to succumb. The legal implications of such scenario concern human dignity, the right of bodily integrity, the right to autonomy and equality.

Second recognized form of coercive enhancement could be defined as “parental” and relates to the coercion of children by their parents. This coercion is illustrated by the obligations of parents to allow their children receive certain enhancement such as education and vaccinations. The extensive topic of coercion of children could be narrowed down to the coercive acts against minors by their parents and guardians. As the law prescribes the obligation that parents are responsible for the conducts of their minor children at the same time parents are granted the right to prevent their children from misconducting through coercive practices. Law leaves room for parental discretion in the terms of coercive measures but also sometimes prescribes mandatory ones. As mentioned, in most countries around the world the first stage of education is obligatory and parents are obliged to send their children to school. That case comprises a mandatory human enhancement practice that is less intrusive in terms of the freedom and autonomy of children. On the other hand, the second mentioned example, namely mandatory vaccinations, demonstrates a legal obligation for coercive enhancement of children that has to be executed by the parents. As children are receivers of the enhancement eventually this form of coercive enhancement could not be defined neither as merely direct, nor merely implicit. The legal prescription that requires parents to coerce their children by certain enhancements for the sake of their own and social health and well-being is very specific and unique due to the participants in this legal mechanism for coercive enhancement. In the same way, an abundance of advanced and inexpensive artificial limbs and muscles on the market in the future might drive to the adoption of identical legal obligations for parents. For instance, due to the proven benefits of limb prostheses for the individual and society in addition to their inexpensive cost a country might adopt legislation obliging parents to enhance their children suffering from congenital limb defects with an artificial limb provided by the national healthcare system. Such coercive enhancement resembles the case with vaccinations due to the believed health benefits for the individual and the prevention of infectious diseases. However, there are many other differences either in the terms of law, or in terms of social benefits justification between the example provided and vaccinations. One crucial difference is the fact that some mandatory vaccinations are aimed to help prevent the spread of these diseases to others.

Third, implicit coercion could be also described as indirect or collateral. When individuals benefit from human enhancement technologies to an extent that they significantly outrank others in some fashion, then the enhanced ones implicitly put coercive pressure on others to employ human enhancement technologies just to stay competitive or to avoid becoming worse off compared to their initial condition.[80] Aging television presenters that have cosmetic enhancements to look youthful in order to compete with the young rising presenters are a striking example of implicit coercion. This form of coercion is also called „coercion of voluntary enhancements” further explained with the instance of the increasing use of steroids and other performance enhancing drugs in sports when other athletes are enhancing themselves as well.[81] In other words, despite their unwillingness to take a performance-enhancing drug, some athletes might feel compelled to do so just to stay competitive. From a societal perspective, enhancements might have coercive effects on people who are not willing to augment themselves, especially in cases that fall into the scope of the medicalisation and normalisation effects already discussed. A real example of the medicalization and normalisation effects in the terms of the implicit coercive enhancement is the case with the New York Times in 2006. Six letters were addressed with regard to the issue of using drugs to alter the behavior of kids.[82] One letter actually illustrates most profoundly the undesirable situation writing the following “Anecdotal evidence about the high percentage of children treated with Ritalin and other prescription drugs suggest that we may be overmedicating” meaning that many of the treated children were given drugs based on no medical reason or illness. [83] To put it more simply, the more children are enhanced by drugs, the standard for the expected results changes and therefore more parents might attempt to keep up within the framework of social norms by overmedicating their children. In fact, such conformity is reflected in the Transhumans concept for human enhancement – coercing individuals to „ pursue an artificial standard rather than a natural one”.[84] So, this kind of coercion in the terms of human enhancement technologies could be describes as “conformity enhancement”. The core of such coercive enhancement comprises the inevitable clash between the reward that the enhanced individuals are awarded or the goal they accomplish thanks to the enhancement in comparison to others, non-enhanced people, struggling to compete with the augmented ones and feeling self-driven and socially pressured to take identical measures to remain competitive.[85] Although in some situations the implicit coercion benefits society and the majority of its members, the right to autonomy and self-determination as well as human dignity and freedom might be at stake. With regard to artificial limbs and muscles, the cited examples and theories might be elaborated on. A sheer employment of artificial limb and muscle technologies due to availability of diverse advanced models on the market might trigger fierce competition between workers, soldiers, sportsmen to have themselves augmented in order to improve their abilities and so significantly increase their productivity, capabilities and achievements. First, workers that are not explicitly coerced to enhance by their employer or supervisor might be implicitly put under pressure by some their colleagues already equipped with artificial limbs or muscles. Employment of moderate bionic arms or legs in future might secure tremendous advantage to those workers who are involved in labor-intensive jobs. When it comes to military, the same scenario might apply either among colleagues in the army, either between enemy armies when soldiers are not explicitly coerced. Turning to sportsmen, athletics are the ones expected in the future to strive to remain competitive with other augmented with artificial limbs or muscles eventually. The notorious case with Oscar Pistorius and his cutting-edge limb prostheses hints the advantages that advanced models of artificial limbs could contribute to their users.

Coercive-enhancement-across-society-soldiers

People ordered by superior authority to be enhanced

As the thesis already discussed the explicit form of coercive enhancement in general, the next paragraphs will elaborate on examples of expected coercive enhancement ordered by superior authority. In general, by superior authority the thesis intends a higher level authority in terms of an organisation. In hierarchical organisations everyone is subordinate to someone else within the organization except the ones on the top of the pyramid. In that context, higher levels of the hierarchical structure are superior authorities compared to others subordinate to them. So, even if hierarchical structures resemble in their layout of pyramids and the different levels existing, the hierarchical organisation within an entity might differ significantly. The distinction could be found in the nature of relationships between levels, the liability for insubordination and the ability to resign from the organisation swiftly. In the light of these considerations, two particular types of entities illustrate considerable differences with regard to the enumerated characteristics, namely businesses and military.

This particular form of coercion in the terms of human enhancement turns out to be expected and discussed not only at academic level but also survey respondents and military experts. Participants in the joint workshop hosted by the Academy of Medical Sciences, the British Academy, the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Royal Society outlined “how pressure might also be felt from employers, both implicitly and explicitly” as a potential social harm regarding the infiltration of human enhancement technologies.[86] Due to the globalization and global economic trends, businesses and stakeholders are driven these days to foster competitiveness and pursue maximizing productivity based on implementation of new technologies; employers are in position to require the employees to utilize various human enhancement technologies. Meanwhile, military experts and scholars alert that soldier enhancement, through biological and technological augmentation of human capabilities is a foreseen trend and so would pose numerous ethical challenges. The rationale of biological enhancement of soldiers would be the extension of physical endurance and improved resilience to injuries and tortures.

In this paragraph only the explicit cases of coercive enhancement will be considered as the implicit coercive enhancement was already discussed. As the scope of the research question primarily covers the coercive enhancement by artificial limbs or muscles, the following possible scenarios will be examined based on specific reasoning. In fact, nowadays employers and businesses do impose requirements to their employees to enhance with respect to their job. Varying from enhancement practices such as trainings to more intrusive practices including providing medicaments or supplements improving employees’ focus and awareness, these still do not clash to a great extent with freedom, human dignity, right to bodily integrity and autonomy. A proliferation of artificial limbs and muscles might lead to coercion exercised by employers towards employees on a whole new level. Implantation of artificial limbs and muscles involve intrusive physical interventions into the human body including surgical procedures.

When it comes to the potential implications for the future of work in relation to proliferation of artificial limbs and muscles, specific occupations and industries are more pliable to be influenced to a greater extent. For example, construction and manufacturing workers are two specific groups at stake. Their labor requires solid limb and muscle capabilities that are being exhausted within the process of work during the years. At the same time, the demanding nature of these occupations implies amputations as a severe workplace hazard. The two aspects of the cited professions determine distinctive scenarios that might be expected in the future in case artificial limbs and muscle technologies become abundant.

Scenario one, a construction company orders some of their employees to be augmented with artificial muscles that will benefit the receivers with exceptional muscle capabilities such as lifting heavier loads. As a result, the company will be able to benefit from this group of augmented construction workers in the long term along with a team for express construction securing the company better market positions. The legal relationship between the company and the workers is based on the employment contract. So, the “augmented crew” will be established only based on the contractual relationship between employee and employer aiming to bring competitiveness of the company and contribute to its future business prosperity.
Scenario two, a major manufacturing company points out as reasons for their coercive enhancement policy the enormous economic losses suffered due to the increasing numbers of worker amputees along with the risk for the health of the workers due to the hazardous nature of the manufacture. The company proposes the workers at stake to be implanted with artificial limbs that prevent them within the process and improve their mobility, precision and diminish the risk of workplace hazard. The essence of the proposal explicitly imposes the dilemma on the employee either to agree the enhancement because it will improve career prospects and prevent his health, or to refuse and be worse off. Both scenarios share common characteristics but actually differ in crucial elements. Indeed, in both plots employees are ordered to be augmented with artificial limbs and muscles. On the other hand, the orders for coercive enhancement differ in their fashion as the first is absolutely explicit in comparison to the other one not that explicit. Another striking difference between both scenarios is the purpose of the coercion and the goal aimed in the terms of the ethics, morality and law. With respect to the research question, the mentioned examples illustrate how flexible the meaning of explicit coercion could be, especially in terms of human enhancement. As inherently competitive activity, companies fight to achieve a particular goal or to execute a business plan successfully at an organizational level. In that manner, the pressure reflects on the employees at an individual level as they are the means to achieve the goals of the company.

As previously discussed in the paper, military needs are a major drive for the research and development of artificial organs and especially artificial limbs including advanced prostheses and bionic limbs. Since some believe that 21th century is the “age of the biomedical military”, cutting-edge models of artificial limb and muscle technologies are highly expected to be progressively employed among warfighters.[87] In light of the considerations related to commanded enhancement by artificial limbs and muscles, soldiers might be ordered by their commanders to be implanted with such artificial organ technologies to improve their battle performance. For example, in cases of soldiers taken prisoners as preventing from tortures such as denailing and toes scission soldiers might be ordered to be augmented with artificial limbs beforehand. As at the moment Dexedrine and Provigil, two drugs approved to treat narcolepsy and other disorders, are used as stimulants to keep US soldiers awake during combat missions. In the same manner is quite possible that soldiers might be physically augmented to run faster, walk further, move swifter and climb higher. The research of advanced exoskeletons and artificial limbs for veteran amputees paves the way of cutting-edge military designs of artificial limb technologies that upgrade the body of soldiers significantly. In that context, to resist tortures, to provide exceptional battle performance including extra endurance, stamina, awareness, and precision alongside minimizing physical suffering, warfighters might be ordered to be turned out into partly machines, partly humans. This scenario, including the coercive enhancement of soldiers, is dissimilar to the coercive enhancement of workers in several aspects. The employment relationship is a contractual legal link between two equal parties that enjoy reciprocal rights and obligations.[88] On the other hand, military is structured based on the “chain of command” concept described as the “the succession of commanding officers from a superior to a subordinate through which command is exercised.”[89] To put it more simply, it comprises an organizational structure where orders are passed from a higher-ranked soldier to lower-ranked personnel down the chain of command. While the employee could refuse to obey orders or instructions of the employer at his discretion and resign, military members who disobey the lawful orders of their superiors risk serious consequences including criminal liability for any military member who “willfully disobeys a lawful command of his superior commissioned officer”.[90] However, it is a grey area to what extent commanding warfighters to be enhanced through physical intrusions into a soldier’s body is a lawful command. Compared to the legal status of an employee, the legal status of soldiers is tremendously debatable and quite slippery topic.

human-augmentation-debate

Limitations of ordered enhancement in the terms of law

Introduction

So far the thesis described the nature of human enhancement, artificial organs and particularly artificial limbs and muscles. Furthermore, expectation for establishing a state of abundance of artificial limb and muscle technologies was outlined. The consequences of such scenarios were presented and narrowed down to the coercive enhancement as a feasible undesirable effect of proliferation of artificial limbs and muscles on the market. Extending the accessibility and the scope of benefits provided to a wider range of technology possessors, artificial limbs and muscles might be projected to be employed by variety of organizations supporting their progress and achievement of aimed goals.

This chapter will elaborate on the legal aspect of the expected coercive enhancement by artificial limbs and muscles. In the previous chapter some rationales of utilization of artificial organ technologies by industries and for military needs were discussed. Due to the increasing number of benefits and advantages that advanced models of artificial limbs and muscles might contribute to the performance and interaction with the surrounding environment of the possessors of these devices, the paper already considered an exponential future growth of employment of the technologies in question. Under these circumstances, the consequences of abundant artificial limbs and muscle technologies might have different implications. Coercion is one of the most common shared considerations and an undesirable effect that might flourish gradually. Frank coercion or explicit coercion might be witnessed in hierarchical organisations where superior authorities order enhancement of their subordinates. In particular, augmentation with artificial limbs and muscles predominantly requires physical intrusions into human’s body. Such coercive enhancement interferes with ethics, morality and law and touches upon the topics of human freedom, bodily integrity, autonomy, human dignity, etc. In the current chapter how ordered enhancement with artificial limbs and muscles interferes with the right to bodily integrity will be examined as well as to what extent superior authorities can order their subordinates to enhance.

explicit-coercion-human-enhancement

The right to bodily integrity considerations

Before examining whether coercive enhancement might interfere the right to bodily integrity, an attempt to outline the essence of this right is necessary.

The right to bodily integrity is not definitely mentioned in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a fundamental human right.[91] However, this right is explicitly embodied in several national constitutions including the Dutch Constitution (Grondwet), the German Constitution (Grundgesetz), the Constitution of Canada.[92] Additionally, Article 3 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights secures the right to bodily integrity as a part of integrity of the person.[93] The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights is considered as a very modern legal framework in terms of bioethics including prohibition of eugenic practices, making the human body and its parts as such a source of financial gain and reproductive cloning of human beings.[94] With regard to European Convention of Human rights, the right to bodily integrity is not specifically recognized but in ECtHR case law it has been interpreted to be part of the right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 of ECHR).[95] The Court reiterated in connection with a forcible gynaecological examination that “a person’s body concerns the most intimate aspect of private life. Thus, a compulsory medical intervention, even if it is of minor importance, constitutes an interference with this right (Article 8)”.[96]In terms of common law, the US Supreme Court has held that “there is a right to be free from unjustified intrusions on personal integrity, suggesting that such a right is protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment”.[97] This includes a variety of contexts such as unsolicited medical procedures, corporal punishment in schools, the decision to forego medical treatment, etc.[98] With regard to that, in common law “the progression of bodily integrity in the courts confirms that the US Supreme Court recognizes and protects people from governmental invasions on personal security. The US Supreme Court ruled that the right to bodily integrity encompasses unwanted surgery, compulsory pregnancies and mandated contraception methods”.[99] According to Article 11 of the Dutch Constitution „Everyone shall have the right to inviolability of his body, without prejudice to restrictions laid down by or pursuant to Act of Parliament”.[100] In the context of the Dutch Constitution article, “the right to bodily integrity explicitly covers the right to prevent others from an individuals harming their body (defensive right) as well as the right for an individual to do whatever they wanted with their body (right of self-determination). The government had a duty to make the positive right possible to be executed. There is a duty of care to ensure that a climate arises in which the constitutional right to inviolability of the human body indeed comes to expression. In general a violation of the right is not tolerated by the Dutch courts unless the violation is justified by a right of another individual that should prevail in the particular case. The right is therefore not an absolute right.”[101] Another definition provided for the right to bodily integrity describes it as “a right to do with one’s body whatever one wants (a right to self-determination) and it implies the right to prevent one’s body from being harmed by others.”[102] Considering these concepts for the right to bodily integrity it should be analyzed how coercive enhancement interferes with this right.

Coercive enhancement poses a variety of questions due to the nature of intrusion involves in all three of its forms abovementioned. Human enhancement in terms of artificial limbs and muscles inevitably comprises physical intrusions into the human body including the implantation of the technology into person’s body and further interaction with living tissues. In the context of common law, such intrusions are not under suspicion if a genuinely voluntary decision is taken.[103] Coercive enhancement covers the two aspects of human enhancement, namely treatment and enhancement of natural human capacity and capabilities. In light of these considerations, competent adults have an “almost right” to refuse medical treatment except in cases with concerns that infectious diseases that might endanger others.[104] When it comes to coercive enhancement in the terms of augmentation of healthy persons, the question to what extent they could be ordered to be enhanced with artificial organs flourishes.[105]

This chapter will employ the examples provided in the previous one related to businesses ordering their employees to be enhanced and military ordering soldiers to be augmented with artificial limbs and muscles. The purpose is to analyze more precisely to what extent people can be ordered by their superiors to be enhanced with artificial organs within business companies and military.

In the first example, when companies order employees to be augmented with models of artificial limb and muscle technologies, either for the sake of the company’s prosperity, or protect workers from workplace hazards, the coerced employees’ right to bodily integrity might be at stake. Why is that? As explained with regard to the definition of the right to bodily integrity adopted by the Dutch Constitution, this right is “meant to provide a protection of the human body, thus to prevent others from infringing the body” and applies to “horizontal relationships” including relations between citizens as well as between citizens and government.[106] With regard to the explicit form of coercion when superior authority orders enhancement of workers, the degree of conducted coercion should be considered in the perspective of the employment relationship. The nature of the relationship between employee and employer is horizontal as both comprise contractual parties in the terms of civil law. The right to bodily integrity allows the worker, ordered to be enhanced with artificial limbs and muscles, to refuse at any time without hesitation. With regard to the technical aspects of the nature of artificial limb and muscle technologies, their utilization requires physical intrusions into person’s body to implant the artificial limb or muscles. In light of these considerations, the right to bodily integrity preserves and secures the ability of the coercee to deny the order by the employer.

When it comes to the example with the construction company willing to augment workers to boost its prosperity, there are a handful of legal obstacles to be considered. First, the right to bodily integrity guarantees that the coercee enjoys legal protection of his bodily integrity from any unwanted treatments or interventions. Implanting an artificial muscle into the human body implies access to that. In the context of explicit coercion, the defensive nature of the right to bodily integrity withholds others from accessing human body.[107] The right to bodily integrity withstands accessing human body and in that manner protects the bodily inviolability of the coercee from any coercive enhancement. The defensive nature of the right to bodily integrity prevents the coercee from the coercive enhancement aspirations of the coercer. Second, in common law and in the EU case law the exercise of the right to bodily integrity can be limited to some extent only to strike a balance between the rights and freedoms of others or if the public interest is at stake.[108] [109] [110] With regard to ECtHR case law, the Court reiterated that a medical intervention against the will of the person “will violate Article 8 of the Convention unless it is “in accordance with the law”, pursues one of the legitimate aims and set out in the second paragraph of that Article, and can be considered “necessary in a democratic society” in pursuit of that aim”.[111] Having to do with the current example, neither there are fundamental human rights endangered, neither general interest should be taken into consideration in the scenario in question. Under these circumstances, any coercive enhancement act that the construction company might conduct towards its workers with respect to ordered implantation of artificial muscles is legally inadmissible and interferes with the right to bodily integrity. Indeed, enhancement that includes any physical intrusions into worker’s body ordered in explicit manner is not only legally inadmissible but also clashes ethics and morality.

Turning to the second instance, namely manufacturing company ordering workers to be augmented with artificial limbs to diminish the risk from workplace hazard and to reduce company healthcare expenditures, the right to bodily integrity still applies and protects the coercee from unwanted enhancement. In this situation, the right to bodily integrity should be considered along with the potential benefit for the individual’s health and safety though. Preservation of human health in this case is probably at stake as health and well-being of the workers is endangered by the hypothetical hazardous work environment. As a general rule, workers are obliged to follow special safety rules and to use personal protective equipment to minimize exposure to workplace hazards. Protective equipment might include clothing, tools, gear or advanced wearable technologies that do not involve physical intrusion into the human body or biochemical interventions at any degree. Nevertheless, in this hypothetical situation the manufacturing company requires enhancement with artificial limbs to be conducted towards some employees as a safety measure.

The rationale of the company states allegedly preservation of human life and protection of worker’s health. Due to the hypothetical nature of the instance it might be examined in two aspects. First, if individual’s health is endangered by the nature of the manufacturing and there is a potential risk for other non-augmented workers’ health the case with mandatory vaccinations is applicable. What might be in common might be a specific hypothetical infectious disease that the non-enhancement with artificial limbs might trigger and spread massively within the manufacturing employees. The legal implication of such scenario would intercept the right to bodily integrity as well as the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Although the right to bodily integrity withstands any undesired intrusions and interventions into person’s body, as in the terms of common law it is reiterated that “the major exception concerns infectious epidemic diseases where one person’s lack of treatment may endanger many others”.[112] In addition, one of the landmark cases of US Supreme Court addressed mandatory vaccinations in regard to smallpox, ruled that the police power of a state absolutely included reasonable regulations established by legislature to protect public health and safety and justified such regulations as they fall within the many restraints to which every person is necessarily subjected “for the welfare of the community”.[113] With regard to EU law and ECHR, the ECtHR concludes that a medical intervention against the will of the person “will violate Article 8 of the Convention unless it is “in accordance with the law”, pursues one of the legitimate aims and set out in the second paragraph of that Article, and can be considered “necessary in a democratic society” in pursuit of that aim”. So, in terms of the right to bodily integrity the ordered enhancement with artificial limbs in this case might be admissible only for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others and in accordance with the law. On the other hand, protection only of the health and well-being of an individual falls again at the domain of the established case law and the concept of the right to bodily integrity prohibiting inviolate intrusion into person’s body. In the light of the US Supreme Court rulings that “a competent person has the right to refuse life-saving nutrition and hydration.”, “[n]o right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law” and the reiterated protection of women against forced Cesarean sections by the right to bodily integrity reinforce conclusion that in this situation the right to bodily integrity outweighs the mandated enhancement due to alleged risk for the employee’s health.[114] [115] In other words, even if there is a real and considerable risk of workplace hazard an exception from the right to bodily integrity is not justified and admissible and therefore coercive enhancement is prohibited in some jurisdictions.

With regard to the military example in the previous chapter, soldiers ordered by superior authority to be enhanced with artificial limbs and muscles, poses again legal, ethical and moral questions rather in another perspective. Could soldiers be ordered to be enhanced with artificial limbs and muscles? Can a warfighter refuse enhancement based on ethical grounds? Are there limits to who should be enhanced?[116] These questions merely touch the large list of uncertainties and considerations that flourish in the context of military human enhancement. However, the scope of the current research questions is narrowed down to enhancement including physical intrusions into the human body that indeed interfere severely with the right to bodily integrity. In comparison to the companies’ organizational system and employment relationship between employer and employees, the military chain of command system differs in many aspects. As it was already discussed, the subordinate military personnel are obliged to obey any lawful order of its superior authorities. Otherwise, military insubordination, if the offense is committed in time of war, is punished by death.[117] According to Article 90 of UCMJ, if the offense is committed at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct. The striking distinction between the punishment for willful disobedience of lawful command of his superior commissioned officer in time of war and at any other time outlines two aspects of the applicability of the right to bodily integrity in the terms of military context. First, in peacetime the ordered enhancement with artificial limbs and muscles should fall into the field of application of the right to bodily integrity at its full degree. In other words, the ordered soldiers enjoy the same constitutional rights and freedoms as civil citizens. Second, in wartime human rights are being neglected for the sake of public interest and achievement of military objectives. Does that mean that the right to bodily integrity might be outweighed by prevailing military objectives during wartime?

The progress in the field of military human enhancement technologies in the recent years is tremendous especially devices developed and introduced by DARPA and the US Department of Defense. Moreover, special programs such as Force Health Protection Concept of Operations (CONOPS), DARPA’s Warrior Web project, etc. are devoted to implementation of the human enhancement technologies into the US military and improving the performance of its service members. That is why the next lines will analyze the emerging military technologies in terms of US law. Distinction is set between the practice of medicine and medical research with respect to US military law. With regard to medicine, the US Department of Defense (DoD) can mandate service members „to be administered treatment of an FDA-approved medical product that the DoD determines is in the best interest of an individual service member or a military mission”.[118] An example in that context is the smallpox vaccine mandate promulgated in 2002 to US troops. DoD went further and adopted the smallpox vaccine as requirement of service, pursuant to military law. Consequently, service members who refused the vaccine are reported to be subjects to court-martial and severe punitive measures.[119] So, from the perspective of the assumed best interest of an individual service member or a military mission coercive biochemical interventions are justified and allowed in the terms of US military law.

On the other hand, with regard to military medical research, several federal regulations and DoD guidelines were adopted providing various safeguards for army personnel who is involved into biomedical research conducted or sponsored by the military to prevent from coercion. Despite of the safeguards laid down in the US legislation on federal and military level, a number of laws in fact negate some of the protections including informed consent waiver, clinical trial setting bypass, etc. [120] Furthermore, in light of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, applicable to all service members in US military, existing regulations in respect to a medical treatment deemed by officials to be necessary for the good of the armed forces do not limit medical-related orders to products approved by the FDA and even to non-FDA-approved. There were even service members prosecuted for their refusal of administration of non-FDA-approved medical products for the use intended by the DoD in the past.[121] The brief look into the U.S. military law regulations and legal framework, carry out some deductions partly related to the right to bodily integrity. First, even in the context of American court decisions upholding mandatory treatment that are believed to “generally old and may be questioned in light of the growth of civil rights over the past century”, at the domain of military law the exceptions swallow the rule.[122] The right to bodily integrity imposes prohibition to everyone who wants to intrude without permission into other human’s body but seems in the terms of military it is plausible to bypass the restrictions of this right aiming to achieve military objectives. That could be a slippery road as mandatory vaccinations and mandated involvement into military medical research programs might pave the way to experimental implantation with cutting-edge artificial limbs or artificial muscles into warfighter’s bodies ordered by governmental bodies. Since majority of the mandatory vaccination programs protect not only the individual’s health but prevent the feasible spread of infectious diseases that could harm multiple service members on a mission at once, such biomedical interventions are legally justified in terms of balancing between individual interest and the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. However, implantation of devices that replace whole body parts comprises a severe intrusion into the human body and interference with the right to bodily integrity. The human body is intruded upon physically to a far greater degree, so the coercee might be pressured significantly to obey to be enhanced.

Second, the above discussed regulations and framework concern predominantly biomedical interventions in peacetime. It is unclear whether in time of war service members would be able to actually opt out of any treatment with enhancements or implantation of experimental devices such as artificial limbs and muscles facing the death punishment in case of insubordination. During wartime the “common welfare” is placed above the respect of human rights and that is why the Geneva Conventions were adopted. In that context, it is a grey area whether enhancements, or enhanced soldiers, are a “weapon” or a “means or method of warfare”, or if they should be deemed “biological agents.” while, under the Hague Convention, warfighting that disturbs the “public conscience” is forbidden.[123] Due to the objective obstacles to bring any cases for coercive enhancement before courts during wartime, court rulings regarding violations of the right to bodily integrity in the terms of coercive enhancement with artificial limbs or muscles might depend merely on post-war tribunals’ trials. What is more, in light of the considerations related to striking a fair balance between individual human rights and general interest the latter might outweigh the violation of certain individual human rights by reason of the greater goal pursued. As a non-absolute, the right to bodily integrity will have to compete with the virtue of public interest and violations might be justified on these grounds. Unlike in peacetime, the duty of governments to care that climate arises in which the constitutional right to inviolability of the human body indeed comes to expression might be unthinkable. What is more, matters of national security and general interest are taken into account to a higher degree in wartimes. In such situations the extent of coercive enhancement ordered by superior authorities towards service members and military personnel might in fact become quite stretchable. The notion based on the collective interests trumping individual interest in matters of national security is described as “military exceptionalism”.[124] Concept in this fashion is founded on the pillars of all exceptions of constitutional rights and freedoms imposed to soldiers in the name of national security. Conclusions in that manner are reinforced by some disturbing news coming from politicians around the world related to governments “planning to opt out of some international human rights law during wartime”.[125] Given the preceding, balancing medical ethics and the right to bodily integrity on the one side and common welfare and national security on the other, an impression is given that the emerging military technologies are being developed and employed in a grey area in the legislation in USA. However, the question of extent of admissible coercive enhancement in respect to military becomes increasing complex and global impact should be considered without any doubts. Other countries such as Russia, China, U.K. and Japan are not far behind and also invest tremendous resources into research and development of military human enhancement technologies that will allow their warfighters to outperform the enemy on the battlefield. It is a matter of time to witness troopers partly machines, party humans on duty.

Conclusion

Since human enhancement has been benefiting humankind for thousands years, nowadays human enhancement technologies are more advanced and progressive than ever. In addition, the ongoing research and development in that broad field suggests improving specifications of the devices. In that context, artificial limbs and muscles are among the rapidly developed technologies that might transform the human body in the future to a partly machine, partly human. Based on the combination of breakthrough inventions in the fields of artificial limbs and muscles, the substantiate opinions and sheer discussions at academic level supported by market reports, the thesis outlined a possible establishment of a state of abundance of artificial limbs and muscles models in future. Given the preceding, coercion as a harmful outcome has been recognized quite regularly and so the implications of such phenomenon should be assessed in the perspectives of law and ethics by legislators. Implantation of artificial limb or muscle into human body implies access to the person’s body. Such an operation might violate the right to bodily integrity. The thesis attempted to assess how explicit coercive enhancement interferes with the right to bodily integrity in terms of common law and EU case law. The right to bodily integrity is called upon to secure the body inviolability of human beings. As considered in the scope of personal integrity and privacy, the right to bodily integrity guarantees that no interventions and invasions towards human body against the will of the person are inadmissible. On the other hand, there are legal exceptions in terms of the right to bodily integrity when this right is permissible to be bypassed on certain legal grounds. In light of these considerations, the protection of the rights and freedoms of others or in other words common welfare requires striking a fair balance between the public interest and individual human rights. With regard to that, every single case of explicit coercive enhancement should be assessed in the aspect of the individual interest and the general one. On top of that, national security and military objectives might demand extraordinary measures and direct coercive enhancement might be evaluated in the perspective of the prevailing public interest and national security during wartime.

Artificial limbs and muscles in the near future might become even a more pressing topic in connection with their designation and legal implications. Consequently, the relation between their multiple applications and employment might determine completely new approach to the right to bodily integrity in terms of law and human enhancement. The debate is open and here is to stay.

Footnotes


[1] Academy of Medical Sciences, the British Academy, the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Royal Society, Human Enhancement and the Future of Work,2012, Available at https://www.acmedsci.ac.uk/viewFile/publicationDownloads/135228646747.pdf, p.44-45

[2] John Steward, “Human Enhancement”, Dartmouth Undergraduate Journal of Science, 2013 <http://dujs.dartmouth.edu/2013/11/human-enhancement/#.V0GbxVKVq9V>

[3] “Human Enhancement”, Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies Official Website, 2016 <http://ieet.org/index.php/tpwiki/human_enhancement>

[4] Ibid

[5] Juengst, Eric and Moseley, Daniel, “Human Enhancement”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/enhancement/>.

[6] Juengst, Eric. “What does Enhancement Mean?”, Enhancing Human Traits: Ethical and Social Implications, p.29

[7] Hasken, Jess (2007) “Coercion in Bioethics,” Macalester Journal of Philosophy: Vol. 16: Iss. 1, Article 3. Available at: http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/philo/vol16/iss1/3

[8] Academy of Medical Sciences, the British Academy, the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Royal Society, Human Enhancement and the Future of Work,2012, Available at https://www.acmedsci.ac.uk/viewFile/publicationDownloads/135228646747.pdf, p.7

[9] Ibid, p.7

[10] Ibid

[11] Carl Elliott, “What’s Wrong With Enhancement Technologies?”, CHIPS Public Lecture, University of

Minnesota, 1998 <http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucbtdag/bioethics/writings/Elliott.html>

[12] Academy of Medical Sciences, the British Academy, the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Royal Society, Human Enhancement and the Future of Work, 2012, Available at https://www.acmedsci.ac.uk/viewFile/publicationDownloads/135228646747.pdf, p.13

[13] Ibid, p.23

[14] Gebelein, C.G. (1984). “Chapter 1: The Basics of Artificial Organs”. In Gebelein, C.G. Polymeric Materials and Artificial Organs (PDF). Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. pp. 1.

[15] Gebelein, C.G. (1984). “Chapter 1: The Basics of Artificial Organs”. In Gebelein, C.G. Polymeric Materials and Artificial Organs (PDF). Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. pp. 2..

[16]Catapano, G.; Verkerke, G.J. (2012). “Chapter 2: Artificial Organs”. In Abu-Faraj, Z.O. Handbook of Research on Biomedical Engineering Education and Advanced Bioengineering Learning: Interdisciplinary Concepts – Volume 1. Hershey, PA: Medical Information Science Reference. pp. 63.

[17] “Artificial Organ.” Segen’s Medical Dictionary. 2011. Farlex, Inc. 14 Jan. 2017 <http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Artificial+Organ>

[18] The Dawn of Biotechnology in Artificial Organs, GALLETTI, PIERRE M.; AEBISCHER, PATRICK; LYSAGHT, MICHAEL J., http://journals.lww.com/asaiojournal/Citation/1995/01000/The_Dawn_of_Biotechnology_in_Artificial_Organs_.9.aspx

[19] Gebelein, C.G. (1984). “Chapter 1: The Basics of Artificial Organs”. In Gebelein, C.G. Polymeric Materials and Artificial Organs (PDF). Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. pp. 1.

[20] Miller-Keane Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Medicine, Nursing, and Allied Health, Seventh Edition. (2003). Retrieved January 14 2017 from http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/prosthesis

[21] Catapano, G.; Verkerke, G.J. (2012). “Chapter 2: Artificial Organs”. In Abu-Faraj, Z.O. Handbook of Research on Biomedical Engineering Education and Advanced Bioengineering Learning: Interdisciplinary Concepts – Volume 1. Hershey, PA: Medical Information Science Reference. pp. 68.

[22] “‘Blade Runner’ Handed Olympic Ban”, BBC SPORT, 2008 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/olympics/athletics/7141302.stm> [accessed 16 January 2017]

[23] “‘Bionic Legs’ For Military Amputees”, BBC News, 2013 <http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-21497473>

[24] “Brain-Controlled Bionic Legs Are Finally Here”, Popular Science, 2015 <http://www.popsci.com/brain-controlled-bionic-legs-are-here-no-really>

[25] Gebelein, C.G. (1984). “Chapter 1: The Basics of Artificial Organs”. In Gebelein, C.G. Polymeric Materials and Artificial Organs (PDF). Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. pp. 4.

[26] Mirvakili, Seyed M. (2013). Niobium Nanowire Yarns and Their Application as Artificial Muscle (M.A.Sc). University of British Columbia.

[27] Tondu B., What Is an Artificial Muscle? A Systemic Approach.. Actuators. 2015; 4(4):336-352.

[28] Ibid

[29] Gebelein, C.G. (1984). “Chapter 1: The Basics of Artificial Organs”. In Gebelein, C.G. Polymeric Materials and Artificial Organs (PDF). Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. pp. 2.

[30] C. S. Haines and others, “Artificial Muscles from Fishing Line and Sewing Thread”, American Association for the Advancement of Science, 343 (2014), 868-872 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1246906>.

[31] Ibid

[32] European Technology Assessment Group, “Technology Assessment on Converging Technologies Report”, 2006, <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=IPOL-JOIN_ET(2006)375882> page i

[33] Ibid, page i-ii

[34] Ibid page iv

[35] Mihail C. Roco and William Sims Bainbridge , “Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance NANOTECHNOLOGY, BIOTECHNOLOGY, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND COGNITIVE SCIENCE”, 2003, Springer

[36] Health Council of the Netherlands. Human enhancement (Ethics and Health Monitoring Report 2003 no. 4). The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands, page 5

[37] Academy of Medical Sciences, the British Academy, the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Royal Society, Human Enhancement and the Future of Work,2012, Available at https://www.acmedsci.ac.uk/viewFile/publicationDownloads/135228646747.pdf,, page 9

[38] Efthimios Parasidis, Emerging Military Technologies: Balancing Medical Ethics and National Security, 47 Case W. Res. J. Int’l L. 167 (2015) Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol47/iss1/13, p.168

[39] Ibid

[40] Ibid

[41] “DARPA Tests Battery-Powered Exoskeletons On Real Soldiers”, IEEE Spectrum, 2015 <http://spectrum.ieee.org/video/robotics/military-robots/darpa-tests-batterypowered-exoskeletons-on-real-soldiers>

[42] “First Batch Of DARPA’s Synthetic Blood Delivered To FDA, Could Be On Battlefields Soon”, Popular Science, 2010 <http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-07/darpas-synthetic-blood-flows-lab-fda-could-be-battlefields-soon>

[43] “Transhumanist Values”, NICK BOSTROM <http://www.nickbostrom.com/ethics/values.html>

[44] Frank Swain, “The People With ‘Animal Powers’”, Bbc.com, 2014 <http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140407-the-people-with-animal-powers> [accessed 22 May 2016].

[45] “Can We Biologically Extend The Range Of Human Vision Into The Near Infrared?”, Experiment – Moving Science Forward, 2014 <https://experiment.com/projects/can-we-biologically-extend-the-range-of-human-vision-into-the-near-infrared> [accessed 22 May 2016].

[46] “Exoskeletons: My Friend With A Robot Skeleton”, BBC Future, 2014 <http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140912-my-friend-and-his-robot-legs>

[47] Danielle Muoio, “Hyundai Created Its Own ‘Iron Man’ Exoskeleton Suit”, Tech Insider, 2016 <http://www.techinsider.io/hyundai-creates-iron-man-exoskeleton-photos-2016-5>

[48] Danielle Muoio, “These Robotic Suits Will Give Workers Superhuman Strength”, Tech Insider, 2016 <http://www.techinsider.io/panasonic-robotic-suits-provides-extra-strength-2016-3>

[49] Ibid

[50] Ventola, C. Lee. “Medical Applications for 3D Printing: Current and Projected Uses.” Pharmacy and Therapeutics 39.10 (2014): 704–711. Print. <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4189697/>

[51] “3D Printed Prosthetics”, Enabling The Future <http://enablingthefuture.org/tag/3d-printed-prosthetics/>

[52] Enable Community Foundation, 2017 <http://www.enablecommunityfoundation.org/>

[53] Body Labs, 2017 <https://www.bodylabs.com/>

[54] “DARPA’s New Biotech Division Wants to Create a Transhuman Future”, 2045 Initiative Official Website, 2014 <http://2045.com/news/32738.html> [accessed 22 May 2016].

[55] Ibid

[56] “Neurotechnology Provides Near-Natural Sense of Touch”, DARPA Official Website, 2015 <http://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2015-09-11> [accessed 22 May 2016].

[57] “Artificial Limbs And Joints Market Size, Application Analysis, Regional Outlook, Competitive Strategies And Forecasts, 2014 To 2020”, Grand View Research <http://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/artificial-limbs-and-joints-market> [accessed 29 January 2017].

[58] ibid

[59] “Orthopedic Prosthetics Market – Global Industry Analysis, Size, Share, Growth, Trends And Forecast 2015 – 2023”, Transparency Market Research <http://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/orthopedic-prosthetics-market.html> [accessed 29 January 2017].

[60] “New Report Offers Global Projections For Orthopedic Prosthetic And Orthotic Markets”, Healio Orthotics/Prosthetics, 2011 <http://www.healio.com/orthotics-prosthetics/industry-news/news/print/o-and-p-news/%7Bc2d04446-465a-4c7d-944b-21fd57603547%7D/new-report-offers-global-projections-for-orthopedic-prosthetic-and-orthotic-markets> [accessed 29 January 2017].

[61] “The Freaky Artificial Muscles On This Human Skeleton Are The Future Of Robotics”, GIZMODO, 2016 <http://gizmodo.com/the-freaky-artificial-muscles-on-this-human-skeleton-ar-1783445499> [accessed 29 January 2017].

[62] C. S. Haines and others, “Artificial Muscles from Fishing Line and Sewing Thread”, American Association for the Advancement of Science, 343 (2014), 868-872 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1246906>.

[63] Leah Burrows, “Artificial muscle for soft robotics: low voltage, high hopes”, Harvard, 2016 <https://www.seas.harvard.edu/news/2016/07/artificial-muscle-for-soft-robotics-low-voltage-high-hopes >

[64] Health Council of the Netherlands. Human enhancement (Ethics and Health Monitoring Report 2003 no. 4). The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands, page 13

[65] Ibid, p.14

[66] Ibid, p.14-15

[67] Chris Lake, CPO, LPO, FAAOP; and Mary Lake, “Society Spotlight The Healing Effects Of Self-Expression For The Prosthetic Patient”, 2011 <http://www.oandp.com/articles/2011-12_02.asp> [accessed 29 January 2017].

[68] Health Council of the Netherlands. Human enhancement (Ethics and Health Monitoring Report 2003 no. 4). The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands, page 14

[69] Ibid

[70] Hasken, Jess (2007) “Coercion in Bioethics,” Macalester Journal of Philosophy: Vol. 16: Iss. 1, Article 3.

Available at: http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/philo/vol16/iss1/3, p.16

[71] Scott Anderson, “Coercion.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2006. Metaphysics Research Lab,

CSLI, Stanford University. 30 November 2006. <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/coercion/>

[72] Ibid

[73] Scott Anderson, “Coercion.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2006. Metaphysics Research Lab,

CSLI, Stanford University. 30 November 2006. <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/coercion/>

[74] Ibid

[75] Ibid

[76] Hasken, Jess (2007) “Coercion in Bioethics,” Macalester Journal of Philosophy: Vol. 16: Iss. 1, Article 3.

Available at: <http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/philo/vol16/iss1/3>

[77] Ibid

[78] Greely, Henry T — “Regulating Human Biological Enhancements: Questionable Justifications and International Complications” [2005] UTSLawRw 4; (2005) 7 University of Technology Sydney Law Review 87 available at <http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UTSLawRw/2005/4.html#fn30>

[79] Ibid

[80] DAN W. BROCK, “Enhancements of Human Function: Some Distinctions for Policymakers”, in Parens, ed. Enhancing Human Traits, pp. 60-61

[81] I. G. Cohen, What (if anything) is Wrong With Human Enhancement? What (if anything) is Right with It?, 49 Tulsa L. Rev. 645 (2014). Available at: <http://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/tlr/vol49/iss3/4>

[82] Blau, Jessamyn. “Using Drugs to Alter Kids’ Behavior” New York Times. November 27, 2006 Section A. p.24.

[83] Hasken, Jess (2007) “Coercion in Bioethics,” Macalester Journal of Philosophy: Vol. 16: Iss. 1, Article 3.

Available at: http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/philo/vol16/iss1/3 p.20

[84] Hasken, Jess (2007) “Coercion in Bioethics,” Macalester Journal of Philosophy: Vol. 16: Iss. 1, Article 3.

Available at: http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/philo/vol16/iss1/3 p.20

[85] I. G. Cohen, What (if anything) is Wrong With Human Enhancement? What (if anything) is Right with It?, 49 Tulsa L. Rev. 645 (2014). Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/tlr/vol49/iss3/4 p.20

[86] Academy of Medical Sciences, the British Academy, the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Royal Society, Human Enhancement and the Future of Work,2012, Available at https://www.acmedsci.ac.uk/viewFile/publicationDownloads/135228646747.pdf p.45

[87] Efthimios Parasidis, Emerging Military Technologies: Balancing Medical Ethics and National Security, 47 Case W. Res. J. Int’l L. 167 (2015) Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol47/iss1/13 , p.168

[88] “Employment Relationship”, International Labour Organization (ILO) <http://ilo.ch/ifpdial/areas-of-work/labour-law/WCMS_CON_TXT_IFPDIAL_EMPREL_EN/lang–en/index.htm> [accessed 29 January 2017].

[89] US Department of Defence Dictionary of Military and Associated Term, available at http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/dod_dictionary/, p.33

[90] UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE, X. Punitive Articles 877 77, article 90, < https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/subtitle-A/part-II/chapter-47>

[91] “Universal Declaration Of Human Rights”, United Nations Official Website <http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/> [accessed 29 January 2017].

[92] M. N. Gasson et al. (eds.), Human ICT Implants: Technical, Legal and Ethical Considerations, Information Technology and Law Series 23, p.85

[93] “CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION”, Official Journal of The European Union <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT&from=EN> [accessed 29 January 2017]. Article 3

[94] Ibid

[95] YF v Turkey (No 24209/94, 22/07/03), European Court of Human Rights, para 33

[96] Ibid

[97] Weiler, Stephanie (1998) “Bodily Integrity: A Substantive Due Process Right to Be Free from Rape by Public Officials,” California Western Law Review: Vol. 34: No. 2, Article 19, p.596 Available at: <http://scholarlycommons.law.cwsl.edu/cwlr/vol34/iss2/19>

[98] Ibid

[99] Ibid, p.601

[100] M. N. Gasson et al. (eds.), Human ICT Implants: Technical, Legal and Ethical Considerations, Information Technology and Law Series 23, , p.85

[101] Ibid

[102] Mark N. Gasson, Human ICT Implants: From Restorative Application to Human Enhancement, Human ICT Implants: Technical, Legal and Ethical Considerations, p.24

[103] Greely, Henry T — “Regulating Human Biological Enhancements: Questionable Justifications and International Complications” [2005] UTSLawRw 4; (2005) 7 University of Technology Sydney Law Review 87

[104] Ibid

[105] Greely, Henry T — “Regulating Human Biological Enhancements: Questionable Justifications and International Complications” [2005] UTSLawRw 4; (2005) 7 University of Technology Sydney Law Review 87

[106] M. N. Gasson et al. (eds.), Human ICT Implants: Technical, Legal and Ethical Considerations, Information Technology and Law Series 23, , p.85

[107] Ibid, p.95

[108] Greely, Henry T — “Regulating Human Biological Enhancements: Questionable Justifications and International Complications” [2005] UTSLawRw 4; (2005) 7 University of Technology Sydney Law Review 87

[109] Weiler, Stephanie (1998) “Bodily Integrity: A Substantive Due Process Right to Be Free from Rape by Public Officials,” California Western Law Review: Vol. 34: No. 2, Article 19, p.600-601

[110] CJEU, Joined cases C-92/09 and C-93/09, Volker and Markus Schecke GbR and Hartmut Eifert v. Land Hessen, 9 November 2010, para. 50

[111] YF v Turkey (No 24209/94, 22/07/03), European Court of Human Rights, para 35,36

[112] Greely, Henry T — “Regulating Human Biological Enhancements: Questionable Justifications and International Complications” [2005] UTSLawRw 4; (2005) 7 University of Technology Sydney Law Review 87

[113] Jacobson v. Massachusetts. 197 U.S. 11(1905). LSU Law Center, para 25-27

[114] Weiler, Stephanie (1998) “Bodily Integrity: A Substantive Due Process Right to Be Free from Rape by Public Officials,” California Western Law Review: Vol. 34: No. 2, Article 19. Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.cwsl.edu/cwlr/vol34/iss2/19, p.600,603

[115] Union Pac. Ry. Co. v. Botsford, 141 U.S. 250, 251, 11 S. Ct. 1000, 1001 (1891)

[116] Col. Dave Shunk, Ethics and the Enhanced Soldier of the Near Future, MILITARY REVIEW January-Feruary 93 ENHANCED SOLDIER, p.95

[117] UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE, X. Punitive Articles 877 77, article 90, < https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/subtitle-A/part-II/chapter-47>

[118] Efthimios Parasidis, Emerging Military Technologies: Balancing Medical Ethics and National Security, 47 Case W. Res. J. Int’l L. 167 (2015) Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol47/iss1/13, p.169

[119] Ibid

[120] Ibid, p.169-173

[121] Ibid, p.177

[122] Greely, Henry T — “Regulating Human Biological Enhancements: Questionable Justifications and International Complications” [2005] UTSLawRw 4; (2005) 7 University of Technology Sydney Law Review 87

[123] Efthimios Parasidis, Emerging Military Technologies: Balancing Medical Ethics and National Security, 47 Case W. Res. J. Int’l L. 167 (2015) Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol47/iss1/13, p.180

[124] Ibid, p.183

[125] “Britain To Opt Out Of Human Rights Law In Wartime”, Newsweek, 2016 <http://europe.newsweek.com/theresa-may-european-court-human-rights-wartime-soldiers-prosecution-iraq-505802?rm=eu> [accessed 29 January 2017].

Damyan Todorov successfully completed LLM Law & Technology at Tilburg University after previosly obtained a “Master of Laws” degree from the University of Sofia ‘St. Kliment Ohridski’.