Current Location:
> This Story

Log in or Register to rate this News Story
Forward Printable StoryPrint Send us your Comments

Never Miss a Story

Sign up for email alerts


More Industry Headlines

UCLA not responsible for patient record release, could set legal precedent Doctors sharing access against facility rules not fault of institution

Texas MakerHealth Space will facilitate the creation of care solutions by nurses Providing tools from 3-D printers to Velcro

International institutions agree on standard for using MR to diagnose prostate cancer Cuts overdiagnosis by 89 percent

Siemens Healthcare selects David Pacitti as new head of North America business Pacitti will take over the position on October 19

Konica Minolta acquires Viztek Cites primary imaging solutions that provide more economic value as incentive to completing deal

228 lawmakers urge Congress to rethink proposed cuts to radiation therapy Prostate, breast could be cut by 25 and 19 percent respectively

Philips and MIT collaborate on better way to evaluate brain injuries Bringing the measurement of intracranial pressure out of the ICU

New wearable “e-patch” cuts health monitoring costs, improves quality Up to eight vital signs in a $10 disposable patch the size of a credit card

Annual mammo screening should start at 40, ACR reiterates Recognizing the benefits is critical to saving lives

Planned Dallas Proton Treatment Center files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy Billionaire investor is calling for new project leadership

Can neuroscience
aid the legal system?

Brain Imaging and Criminal Law

by Astrid Fiano , DOTmed News Writer
MacArthur Law and Neuroscience Project (LNP) out of the University of California, Santa Barbara, is an organization devoting serious research to the use of brain imaging in criminal law. Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, PhD, Co-Director of the LNP and Professor of Philosophy and Legal Studies at Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, spoke to DOTmed about the goals of the Project and its research topics.

Prof. Sinnott-Armstrong explained that the project developed from the MacArthur Foundation seeking useful projects to pursue. Dr. Robert Sapolsky, Professor of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, at Stanford University, suggested that the criminal justice system was in need of reform, and neuroscience could help. The Foundation approached Professor Sinnott-Armstrong, along with Art Singer, and they put together an advisory board. Dr. Michael Gazzaniga, of the University of California, Santa Barbara (future Director of the Project), and Stephen Morse, Professor of Psychology and Law in Psychiatry from the University of Pennsylvania Law School (future Legal Director of the Project) were on the advisory board, and crucial to the successful proposal to the Foundation and inception of the project. The participants were motivated in part to use "good" neuroscience to aid the legal system and in part to avoid the influence of "bad" neuroscience in the courtroom.

Story Continues Below Advertisement

Up To 80% Off on Medical Display Monitors! Call (832) 877-1250

We are wholesaler of pre-owned and new brand name medical display monitors. We have top brand grayscale and color LCD monitors with up to 3 years warranty and at least a 30 days money back guarantee at up to 80% off MSRP. DOTmed Certified

Good vs. Bad

What can be considered a "bad" use of neuroscience? Professor Sinnott-Armstrong points out a recent case in India. A process involving EEGs, called the Brain Electrical Oscillations Signature test (BEOS) was developed by Champadi Raman Mukundan, an Indian neuroscientist and former director of the clinical psychology department of the National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences in Bangalore. The results of the process were used in court for a murder case in Pune, India. According to the International Herald-Tribune, the judge cited the scan as proof the defendant's brain held guilty knowledge concerning the crime. The defendant was sentenced to life in prison. However, current brain state and imaging technology does not yet appear to function at the level of reliability most legal systems demand.

Using inferences from neuroscience for legal conclusions raises a question at every step, Professor Sinnott-Armstrong points out. As an example, an imaging procedure might be good to detect a structural abnormality within the brain, such as a tumor, but how relevant is the procedure to a legal situation--what does it have to do with criminal responsibility? In other words, can we infer from the brain scan that the person couldn't control his or her actions due to that tumor?

Continue reading Brain Imaging and Criminal Law...
  Pages: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - ... >>


Interested in Medical Industry News? Subscribe to DOTmed's weekly news email and always be informed. Click here, it takes just 30 seconds.
Increase Your
Brand Awareness
Auctions + Private Sales
Get The
Best Price
Buy Equipment/Parts
Find The
Lowest Price
Daily News
Read The
Latest News
Browse All
DOTmed Users
Ethics on DOTmed
View Our
Ethics Program
Gold Parts Vendor Program
Receive PH
Gold Service Dealer Program
Receive RFP/PS
Healthcare Providers
See all
HCP Tools
A Job
Parts Hunter +EasyPay
Get Parts
Recently Certified
View Recently
Certified Users
Recently Rated
View Recently
Certified Users
Rental Central
Rent Equipment
For Less
Sell Equipment/Parts
Get The
Most Money
Service Technicians Forum
Find Help
And Advice
Simple RFP
Get Equipment
Virtual Trade Show
Find Service
For Equipment
Access and use of this site is subject to the terms and conditions of our LEGAL NOTICE & PRIVACY NOTICE
Property of and Proprietary to, Inc. Copyright ©2001-2015, Inc.