Recently published in SSRN (and recently published in Journal of Law and Biosciences, vol 1, pp 224-236 (2014)):
OWEN D. JONES, Vanderbilt University - Law School & Dept. of Biological Sciences
RICHARD J. BONNIE, University of Virginia - School of Law
BJ CASEY, Sackler Institute for Developmental Psychobiology
ANDRE DAVIS, US Court of Appeals - Fourth Circuit
DAVID L. FAIGMAN, University of California Hastings College of the Law
MORRIS B. HOFFMAN, Second Judicial District Court Judge, State of Colorado
READ MONTAGUE, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University - Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute
STEPHEN MORSE, University of Pennsylvania Law School
MARCUS E. RAICHLE, Washington University School of Medicine
JENNIFER A. RICHESON, Northwestern University - Department of Psychology
ELIZABETH S. SCOTT, Columbia University - Law School
LAURENCE STEINBERG, Temple University
KIM A. TAYLOR-THOMPSON, New York University School of Law
ANTHONY D. WAGNER, Stanford University - Psychology
GIDEON YAFFE, Yale Law School
RICHARD J. BONNIE, University of Virginia - School of Law
BJ CASEY, Sackler Institute for Developmental Psychobiology
ANDRE DAVIS, US Court of Appeals - Fourth Circuit
DAVID L. FAIGMAN, University of California Hastings College of the Law
MORRIS B. HOFFMAN, Second Judicial District Court Judge, State of Colorado
READ MONTAGUE, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University - Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute
STEPHEN MORSE, University of Pennsylvania Law School
MARCUS E. RAICHLE, Washington University School of Medicine
JENNIFER A. RICHESON, Northwestern University - Department of Psychology
ELIZABETH S. SCOTT, Columbia University - Law School
LAURENCE STEINBERG, Temple University
KIM A. TAYLOR-THOMPSON, New York University School of Law
ANTHONY D. WAGNER, Stanford University - Psychology
GIDEON YAFFE, Yale Law School
President Obama charged the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues to identify a set of core ethical standards in the neuroscience domain, including the appropriate use of neuroscience in the criminal-justice system. The Commission, in turn, called for comments and recommendations.
The MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Law and Neuroscience submitted a consensus statement, published here, containing 16 specific recommendations. These are organized within three main themes: 1) what steps should be taken to enhance the capacity of the criminal justice system to make sound decisions regarding the admissibility and weight of neuroscientific evidence?; 2) to what extent can the capacity of neurotechnologies to aid in the administration of criminal justice be enhanced through research?; and 3) in what additional ways might important ethical issues at the intersection of neuroscience and criminal justice be addressed?
The MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Law and Neuroscience submitted a consensus statement, published here, containing 16 specific recommendations. These are organized within three main themes: 1) what steps should be taken to enhance the capacity of the criminal justice system to make sound decisions regarding the admissibility and weight of neuroscientific evidence?; 2) to what extent can the capacity of neurotechnologies to aid in the administration of criminal justice be enhanced through research?; and 3) in what additional ways might important ethical issues at the intersection of neuroscience and criminal justice be addressed?
Comments