Introduction
VR technology (which stands for virtual reality) is an appliance that allows people to physically engage with a virtual world through the use of motion tracking. Various types of simulations can be displayed within headsets, which allows for the use of VR for a plethora of medical purposes. These purposes are mainly training, improving the process of physical therapy, and enhancing psychotherapy. With VR, surgeons can fully explore the human body and brain, and patients can complete physical exercises with motion-enabled games (Javaid & Haleem, 2020). In addition, mental health professionals can use VR for exposure therapy, putting a patient in the simulated environment where the traumatic experience took place.
The Moral Problems of VR in Healthcare
First of all, the moral aspect of VR in healthcare concerns the patients’ privacy. Given that VR tracks the movements of the user, valuable information, such as interactions with codes on various devices, could be stolen in case of hacking (Javaid & Haleem, 2020). Second of all, if malware obtains access to the patient’s device, it can create severe distress during the treatment session, which is especially dangerous when dealing with mental trauma. Exposure therapy is a delicate matter that should be taken with all possible precautions since it handles such serious problems as panic disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, phobias, and so on. These moral problems pose the question of whether or not it is necessary to use these devices and if it is ethical to allow for such potential risks to occur in healthcare settings.
Ethical Guidelines
With the before-mentioned moral issues, the ethical decision would be to abolish the risks, avoid using the technology, or opt for risk prevention. The benefits are far too great to avoid it, and the annihilation of risks is technologically impossible at the current stage of development. Therefore, the following ethical guidelines focus on the third solution. The core basis for the prevention, in this case, would be transparency. The medical professional responsible for the introduction of these devices to the patients needs to candidly explain possible risks and require the patient’s consent to employ VR in treatment.
Ethical Egoism and Utilitarian Ethics Reaction
The ethical egoist would approve of using VR technologies despite their potential dangers. An ethical egoist’s concerns lie not only within the realm of instant gratification but also in the security of their future (Rachels, 2003). Therefore, they would choose the route of transparency as well since it allows them to make a well-rounded decision for the sake of their benefit. A follower of utilitarian ethics would take a similar approach to the dilemma. The ethics of utilitarianism postulate that the action that brings the most happiness is the correct one (Rachels, 2003). The use of prevention measures would allow many people to access exceptional treatment and training, which achieves the goal of achieving people’s happiness.
Various Ethical Approaches
Depending on the culture, the approach to ethical dilemmas might differ dramatically. Since the given technology deeply involves the issue of privacy, there could be a major gap in perception between individualism-driven and collectivism-driven societies. The difference between these two cultural peculiarities is that individualistic societies focus on a person, while collectivistic ones lay stronger emphasis on the community. Cultures, where collectivism is more prominent might not agree with the preponderance of VR’s benefits over its risks since they place a larger value on privacy (Li, 2022). Consequently, they might devise their own culture-specific ethical guidelines. India, China, Japan, and Indonesia are examples of countries with heightened collectivism.
Conclusion
In conclusion, VR technology can greatly influence the field of healthcare. It can be applied for training among doctors and nurses and physical and psychological therapy. The moral concerns with VR lie in the realm of privacy and therapy session disruptions. Hacking and malware pose a serious danger to this type of equipment. An ethical solution to these issues is to be fully transparent with the patients about the possible risks. Ethical egoists and utilitarianism followers would agree with these guidelines. Depending on whether a culture values individualism over collectivism, the approach toward the issue of privacy can vary greatly. Countries that value collectivism and, therefore, might be opposed to these guidelines are China, India, Indonesia, and Japan.
References
Javaid, M., & Haleem, A. (2020). Virtual reality applications toward medical field. Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health, 8(2), 600–605.
Li, Y. (2022). Cross-cultural privacy differences. In: B. P. Knijnenburg, X. Page, P. Wisniewski, H. R. Lipford, N. Proferes, J. Romano (Eds.), Modern socio-technical perspectives on privacy (pp 267–292). Springer.
Rachels, J. (2003). The elements of moral philosophy. 4th ed. McGraw Hill Higher Education.