Boston University School of Law
Participants in the psychosurgery controversy generally espouse one of three competing points of view. First, there are the surgeons who argue that psychosurgical procedures have developed beyond the experimental stage to the point where they may be considered therapeutic for certain types of patients. Second, there are those who support further research in the area in the hope of developing genuinely therapeutic procedures, but who recognize the importance of safeguarding against potential abuses in the course of this development. Finally, there are the anti-psychosurgeons, who argue for the total prohibition of psychosurgery on ethical, spiritual, or political grounds independent of its characterization as experimental or therapeutic.
George J. Annas,
Psychosurgery: The Law's Response,
Boston University Law Review
Available at: https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/1209