SEARCH
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

A day at ECRI Institute's medical device testing laboratory Exploring three topics hospital execs need to know about

7 Tesla MR shows promise in first-of-its-kind cardiac study Yields value in diagnosing hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Jury rules Philip Morris won’t have to cover chest CT scans for smokers Would have cost tobacco giant about $5 million annually

Hospitals are participating in fewer health insurance networks in 2016 New research suggests it may be part of normal market evolution

Britain's junior doctors striking in contract dispute Doctors say government rejected 'fair' offer

Against the odds, Princeton Baptist cardiologist saves patient's life First-of-its-kind 20 hour procedure conducted on massive aneurysm

Optical Coherence Tomography scanner a boon to basal-cell diagnosis VivoSight OCT may lead to a future with fewer biopsies

Philips and Validic aim to combine fitness data with the EHR Adding medical value to consumer wearables

With Avicenna, IBM Watson Health interprets radiology images Commercialization preparations are just beginning

Are low dose radiation concerns based on bad science? Loyola research team thinks so Examining the harmful side of dose preoccupation

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

CONNECT AS IF LIFE DEPENDS ON IT! Because in many ways it does

And we can help. Conserus™ offers a flexible, vendor-neutral suite of imaging solutions that help orchestrate interoperability between existing systems and among specialists while helping to simplify the transition from volume to value-based care.



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 - ... >>

Related:


Interested in Medical Industry News? Subscribe to DOTmed's weekly news email and always be informed. Click here, it takes just 30 seconds.
Advertise
Increase Your
Brand Awareness
Auctions + Private Sales
Get The
Best Price
Buy Equipment/Parts
Find The
Lowest Price
Daily News
Read The
Latest News
Directory
Browse All
DOTmed Users
Ethics on DOTmed
View Our
Ethics Program
Gold Parts Vendor Program
Receive PH
Requests
Gold Service Dealer Program
Receive RFP/PS
Requests
Healthcare Providers
See all
HCP Tools
Jobs/Training
Find/Fill
A Job
Parts Hunter +EasyPay
Get Parts
Quotes
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
Quotes
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 DOTmed.com, Inc. Copyright ©2001-2016 DOTmed.com, Inc.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED