Search

BACKGROUND: The early involvement of many actors including health professionals is identified in neuroethics and neurogovernance discussions as crucial in constructing conversations around awareness, reaction, and knowledge development pertaining to the ethical, legal, and societal consequences of neuroscientific or neurotechnological advancements (NA). Occupational Therapists (OTs) have a stake in NA; however, OTs are rarely mentioned within this context. Lifelong learning (LL) could be used to increase OTs knowledge on NA and its consequences. However, LL is rarely mentioned within neuroethics and neurogovernance discussions. OBJECTIVE: The study's purpose is to understand the role of OTs as professionals and citizens in neuroethics and neurogovernance discussions and to examine the utility of LL processes put in place for OTs to empower OTs to contribute in a meaningful way to NA discussions. METHODS: 8 semi-structured interviews with OTs were conducted and analyzed using a directed content analysis. RESULTS: Although participants believed OTs can provide a holistic perspective to neurogovernance discussions, their knowledge on NA and its consequences is limited, and LL is not used as a tool to remain informed about such consequences. CONCLUSION: More education on NA and its consequences throughout their OT degree and through LL opportunities is warranted to facilitate their involvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: People with disabilities face participation challenges in all occupations. Scientific and technological advancements impact the occupational landscape of humans. This scoping review aimed to ascertain the academic engagement with occupation in relation to robotics and human enhancement focusing in particular on how people with disabilities and rehabilitation were mentioned. Method: SCOPUS and the 70 databases of EBSCO host were searched. Manifest and latent content coding and thematic grouping of codes relevant to answering the review questions was performed. Results: Only four articles engaged with occupation in relation to human enhancement. As to occupation and robotics, some occupational fields were visible and not others; occupational health and safety was the most visible one; people with disabilities were covered from a medical, therapeutic angle and not in relation to social issues caused by the occupational impact of robotics. Change in the scope, meaning, and clients of rehabilitation efforts related to occupation enabled by human enhancement and robotics was not covered. Conclusions: The gaps found should be filled. The impact of robotics and human enhancement on the occupational landscape indicates the need for rehabilitation to think beyond recovery to the species typical as a goal. The ultrabilitation concept could help to meet this need. Advances in robotics and human enhancement beyond species-typical levels modify the occupational landscape, human ability expectations in this setting, and the meaning and scope of disability and rehabilitation (clinical and community based). There is a need to elucidate the impact of these changes on the meaning, scope and goals of recovery-oriented rehabilitation. The recently coined term "ultrabilitation" creates space to discuss an ability expectation creep triggered by developments in robotics and human enhancement, particularly within occupation focused rehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Science, technology and innovation (STI) governance concerns itself with the societal impact of STI. Occupation, whether used with the meaning of paid, unpaid work or any activity that is considered meaningful to the individual on an everyday basis, is one area of societal impact of STI. Fields such as occupational therapy, occupational science and occupational health and safety concern themselves with the relationship between occupation and the health and well-being of human beings albeit all with different foci. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the knowledge of students from two Occupational Therapy programs on STI governance, specific STI products and their views on the impact of STI governance and STI products on occupational therapy and its clients. METHODS: Online survey employing Yes/No' questions with comment boxes and open-ended textbox questions. Descriptive quantitative and thematic qualitative data was generated. RESULTS: Students were unfamiliar with STI governance discourses but felt that they should be aware of them. Students stated that how one governs STI impacts occupational therapy on all levels and that the occupational therapy community has expertise that would enrich STI governance discourses around occupation. CONCLUSION: Education actions seem to be warranted on the level of students and practitioners by the occupational therapy and STI governance communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]