(De)Regulating Neuroenhancement

A recent rise in abusing neuroenhancing pharmaceuticals without a prescription, especially in academic settings, has generated a lot of press coverage. Movies like Lucy and Limitless “predict[] a future in which a smart pill allows one to achieve almost limitless learning and memory ability.” Whether and how regulations should be introduced to address neuroenhancement remain open questions. This Article explores these questions, and proposes to allow each individual, either as adult or a parent of minors, to self-regulate his/her or his/her children’s use of neuroenhancing pharmaceuticals. Government efforts and funding should instead be focused on educating users on the side effects of neuroenhancers. There should be a strict prohibition against coercion and discrimination in the employment settings. With neuroenhancing internal devices, the FDA should defer to the medical professionals to determine whether an individual would benefit from such technology without much harm. There are three main arguments for this proposal. First, this proposal would likely solve the current systemic unfairness problem and level the playing field for individuals not having access to neuroenhancing pharmaceuticals. Second, this proposal would likely promote individualism, which aligns well with our Constitution’s guaranty of freedom. Third, this proposal would likely result in a positive net effect on the society at large, such as “smarter,” less stressed and healthier people, more innovations, preserving healthcare resources, and ultimately benefiting the U.S. economy.