Best Practices: Anne Frank- An Exhibition of World Perspectives  |  Best Practices: Learning Sciences by Simulated Flying  |  Science Innovations: Bacteriophages may play a role in childhood stunting  |  Teacher Insights: How novelty speeds up learning  |  Science Innovations: A major milestone in genetic research   |  Teacher Insights: Older people love learning from persons not machines   |  Technology Inceptions: Wearables to revolutionise the early detection of diseases  |  Parent Interventions: Why should we re-double efforts to promote children’s digital resilience  |  Technology Inceptions: Curd making refrigerator  |  Health Monitor: Missing proteins in neurological disorders in children  |  Parent Interventions: Sperm quality influenced by diet  |  Technology Inceptions: Canon's New Flagship EOS-1D X Mark III   |  Rajagiri Round Table: The 57th RRT shares more creative ways of vacation  |  National Edu News: Introduction of two levels of Mathematics for examination  |  National Edu News: CBSE shares guidelines for parents   |  
February 03, 2018 Saturday 06:10:26 PM IST

Legal neuroscience awaits furtherance

Science Innovations

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