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 Weekly Top Stories

 

More Industry Headlines

Focused ultrasound treatment helps coma patient get back in action Portable device might be developed in future

Mylan CEO comments on ‘broken health care system’ amid EpiPen controversy Offers coupons up to $300

Researchers use zinc to identify prostate cancer under MR Diminished zinc levels may warn of cancer pervasiveness

HTMs are evolving into hospital leadership role: CEAI They are being heard and doing more — but it's still not enough

Who will step up after Mary Logan steps down? Big leadership shoes to fill for the AAMI

A call for vigilance against device-related accidents at CEAI Understanding where human and technical factors combine for disaster

Mallinckrodt sells nuclear imaging business to IBA Molecular for $690 million Company puts more focus on specialty pharmaceutical business

Study shows MR-guided focused ultrasound decreases essential tremors by almost half Research conducted with InSightec's ExAblate Neuro

Researchers devise edible batteries that could power ingestible medical devices Made of melanin and dissolvable materials

Medical device companies will pony up $1 billion under new FDA user fee agreement Funds will go toward improving device review program

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

Streamline Your Radiology Workflow with RamSoft's PowerServer RIS/PACS

The PowerServer RIS/PACS is a single database application, essential to reducing redundant work, limiting manual data entry, and increasing consistency throughout healthcare practices. Click to learn how it will help you improve patient care and more.



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?
  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