Technology Inceptions: Facebook unveils TV streaming devices  |  Science Innovations: Airborne bacteria from ocean seeding clouds  |  Teacher Insights: Beware of stress in parenting  |  Parent Interventions: Classroom Management Impacts Students  |  International Edu News: Oxford grabs top slot in varsity rankings  |  Cover Story: Mark of a School  |  Education Information: Delhi Asks Government Schools to Ensure Bag Weight Criteria  |  Management lessons: Employees Concerned About Job Meaning As Much as Pay Cheque  |  National Edu News: CBSE makes Mandatory for Schools to Become Water Efficient in Next Three Years.  |  Health Monitor: Protein Treatment to Supplement Insulin Therapy for Diabetes Developed  |  Management lessons: Failures Do Not Often Lead to Valuable Learning  |  Technology Inceptions: Apple's Latest iPhone 11 Range  |  Science Innovations: Wildflower Adapts to Climate Change  |  Parent Interventions: Family-School Initiative Benefits Students  |  Technology Inceptions: How to Reduce Heat Generated in Artificial Retina?  |  
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