Leadership Instincts: A new tool to decide on making or breaking a dam developed  |  Science Innovations: The death and resurrection of kilogram  |  Parent Interventions: Music improves communication skills of autistic children   |  Teacher Insights: Do you undergo ‘social jet lag’?  |  Parent Interventions: Social media could affect self-esteem of women  |  Technology Inceptions: Raspberry Pi 3 Model A+ With 512MB RAM, 5GHz Wi-Fi Connectivity Launched  |  Technology Inceptions: AMD Radeon RX 590 Mid-Range GPU Announced for Full-HD PC Gaming  |  Leadership Instincts: When ‘small changes’ better than ‘no change’ at all  |  Science Innovations: Alexa and Siri may in future learn language as kids do!  |  Teacher Insights: Ideas are contagious as disease  |  Science Innovations: Universe: Why is there something, instead of nothing?  |  Technology Inceptions: NASA's Hubble Telescope finds smiling face in space  |  Cover Story: HOME TRANSFORMERS FAMILIES WILL NEVER BE THE SAME  |  Cover Story: Thou shalt not discriminate  |  Rajagiri Round Table: FOR AN EQUAL SHARE OF THE PIE  |  
  • Pallikkutam Magazine
  • Companion Magazine
  • Mentor
  • Smart Board

February 03, 2018 Saturday 06:10:26 PM IST
Legal neuroscience awaits furtherance

3 rd February, 2018: Neuroscience has made inroads into the human psyche and assists investigations into the culpability of individuals to the crime. However, the legal neuroscience or “Neurolaw” lags very much behind this development. Advances in neuroscience allows for brain imaging with could reveal in most part the culpability of the individual to a crime. Neuroscience experts are often invited to testify in the courtroom. However, there are widespread doubts about the incursion of neuroscience into the legal sphere constitute a threat to individual liberties. In a review paper titled, “Integrating Brain Science and Law: Neuroscientific Evidence and Legal Perspectives on Protecting Individual Liberties”, Calvin J. Kraft, Program of Liberal Studies, Neuroscience and Behavior, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, United States and James Giordano, Departments of Neurology and Biochemistry, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States outline individual rights as they interact with neuroscientific methods. The paper also examines the current uses of neuroscientific evidence, and ultimately tries to determine whether the rights of the individual are endangered by such approaches. The authors concludes that the legal framework lags behind the advances in neuroscience and it is high time for the legal and neuroscientific communities to work together to better define the limits, capabilities, and intended direction of neuroscientific methods applicable for use in law.

Comments