If someone told you there was something you could take to allow you to focus better and essentially allow you to accomplish more and more efficiently, would you take it? This is called a Neuroenhancer, some commonly known examples are Adderall and Ritalin. These drugs are taken by those who need aid in staying concentrated which is why a lot of younger kids are prescribed it to stay focused while in school. So if this drug is proven to mainly benefit people, why do the ethical problems come into play when older adults and mainly college students wish to take it? If the end state is a longer attention span, who is that hurting by taking it?

Richard Dees talks about the potential for Neuroenhancements in his journal, Better Brains, Better Selves? He addresses the elephant in the room about how people aren’t comfortable with the idea of taking a drug that alters your abilities. But people are too quick with assumptions sometimes, because even though people associate the word drugs with being bad or harmful, these drugs can help people. “First, drugs may be able to improve our ability to think. Amphetamines can help people to learn skilled motor tasks, like playing the piano, more rapidly. Cholinesterase inhibitors now help people with Alzheimer’s Disease to improve their attention and memory, and better versions may help virtually anyone” (Dees 372). He then goes on to say, “Amphetamines, like Ritalin, improve focus, attention, and memory for everyone, not just children with Attention Deficit Disorder. Some drugs may help the formation of long term memories and thereby facilitate learning” (Dees 372). 

Most people have probably heard the statement, there aren’t enough hours in the day. I can personally relate to that statement as I’m sure many others can as well, especially those who are in college like myself. Having such a huge responsibility, like college, puts a lot of pressure and stress on people and Kinan Muhammed understands that stress, “In an age of modern technology and an increasing movement towards a 24-h working culture, life for many is becoming more stressful and demanding” (Muhammed 239). Having to juggle a social life, school, work, etc. it’s hard to stay on top of everything. So why not help yourself out if it is going to allow you to succeed in the future? When reading a paper by David Shaw about Neuroenhancers, addiction, and research ethics, this statement in particular stood out to me, “On the contrary, it is frequently argued that Neuroenhancement is just a step up the ladder from hiring a tutor or study guide” (Shaw 607). 

“Patients have rights to patients’ rights to self-medication for the same reasons they have rights to refuse medical treatment according to the doctrine of informed consent (DIC)” (Flanigan 579). Jessica Flanigan, the author of Three Arguments Against Prescription Requirements, makes this statement and then proceeds to not only explain, but justify her responses. For years we have been self-medicating ourselves when it comes to taking Tylenol if you have a headache, or even taking Nyquil before bed if you have a cold. So how is it any different if someone self-medicates with Adderall or Ritalin if they’re taking it to better themselves. In another paper by Flanigan she states, “I argue that young patients should be able to access Neuroenhancing drugs without a diagnosis of ADHD” (Flanigan 325).

Over time, almost everything is bound to progress and change in some way. We as humans are continuously evolving and growing throughout our lives and were not the only ones or things; animals, climate, nature, technology, behavior, etc. you could go on forever naming things that evolved over time. But when these things change around us, we have been taught to adapt to our new environment. Why is it so hard for us to adjust around the idea of openly consuming beneficial Neuroenhancers? The ethical questions of course come into play, but it has been proved time and time again that the positives outweigh the possible negatives, such as side-affects and addiction. 
