Neuroethics & Law Blog

Stanford Seeking Law and Biosciences Fellows

Via this link:

Description

Stanford Law School invites applications for the 2016-2017 Fellowship Program at the Center for Law and the Biosciences.

The Goal:

This fellowship is intended for people who want an academic or policy career working on legal and social issues arising from advances in the biosciences, with a particular emphasis on neuroscience, genetics, or stem cell research. (Ten of our former fellows are now teaching at universities in the United States, Asia, and Europe.)
 

Qualifications

The Fellowship:

The Center for Law and the Biosciences Fellowship is a residential fellowship that provides an opportunity to conduct research in the dynamic environment of Stanford Law School. We prefer two-year fellowships to help the fellow complete a significant body of independent scholarship, but we are willing to consider one-year terms. We expect fellows to dedicate most of their time to pursuing their proposed research projects, while dedicating about one-sixth of their time to organizing and implementing other Center activities, including our annual conference, our monthly speaker series, our biweekly journal club, and our other activities, as well as writing for our blog. Fellows are encouraged to become part of a lively law-school-wide community of individuals with an interest in legal academia by attending weekly faculty lunch seminars and participating in activities with the other fellows at Stanford Law School to learn more about their legal scholarship and academic life. For the 2016-2017 fellowship, we will provide fellows with work space, a competitive stipend, and a generous benefits package. Applicants should have a JD or other doctoral level degree (MD, PhD) in a relevant area. A law degree is a substantial advantage, but is not a requirement.

The Center:

The Center for Law and the Biosciences, directed by Professor Hank Greely, examines bioscience discoveries in the context of the law, weighing their impact on society and the law’s role in shaping that impact. The Center is part of the Stanford Program in Law, Science & Technology.

Located at the heart of the world’s biotechnology industry and inside a preeminent research university, the Center brings together academics, lawyers, scientists, policy-makers, and students. Through conferences, workshops, lectures, and academic courses, the Center promotes research and public discourse on the ethical, legal, scientific, economic, and social implications of accelerated technological change in the life sciences. For more information, visit our website at clb.stanford.edu.

The Application Process:

Applicants should submit a CV with contact information for three references, a writing sample, and a research proposal (2000 words or less) to the Stanford Career website: stanfordcareers.stanford.edu

Application Deadline: Monday, November 30, 2015 at 5:00 PM Pacific time. We will choose fellows based on demonstrated academic merit and potential, and on the intellectual strength of their research proposals. Decisions will be made on or around Monday, December 14, 2015.

PEBS Neuroethics Roundup (JHU)

Last Edition's Most Popular Article(s): How to Tell Whether A Child Might Become A Psychopath, As Early As Five Weeks Old, Quartz In The Popular Press: Brain Stimulation in Children Spurs Hope — and Concern, Nature News Paraplegic Man Walks With Own Legs Again, The Guardian Neuroscience Backs Up the Buddhist Belief that “The Self” Isn’t Constant, but Ever-Changing, Quartz Inside Pixar’s SadLab, Where Scientists Test Out New Ways to Make You Cry, Slate Cori Bargmann Puts Her Mind to How the Brain Works, New York Times Brian Williams returns to the air – and memory research says we should give him a break, The Conversation Is Depression Treatable with a Mobile Phone App?, New York Times Is The Changing Definition of Autism Narrowing What We Think of As ‘Normal’?, The Conversation All the Questions About Artificial Neural Networks You Were Too Afraid to Ask, Gizmodo Guest Post: Mental Health Disorders in Prison: Neuroethical and Societal Issues, Practical Ethics, University of Oxford Software Is Smart Enough for SAT, but Still Far From Intelligent, New York Times It’s Not a Lack of Self-Control That Keeps People Poor, The Conversation In the Academic Literature: 3D Printed Anatomical Nerve Regeneration Pathways, Advanced Functional Materials On Synaptic Circuits, Memory, and Kumquats, NEJM Enhanced Neural Responses to Imagined Primary Rewards Predict Reduced Monetary Temporal Discounting, Journal of Neuroscience Playing 20 Questions with the Mind: Collaborative Problem Solving by Humans Using a Brain-to-Brain Interface, PLOS One Upcoming Events: 2015 International Neuroethics Society Meeting October 15-16 in Chicago, IL Early Registration Deadline: September 10

Subscribe to our mailing list The Program in Ethics and Brain Sciences (PEBS) is a collaborative effort of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics and the Johns Hopkins Brain Sciences Institute . The goal of PEBS is to ensure that research in brain science proceeds with an informed understanding of ethical issues, and that philosophical and empirical analyses of the advances in brain research proceed with an informed understanding of the science.

Kolber on "Free Will As a Matter of Law"

I have recently posted a new paper to SSRN. It's called Free Will as a Matter of Law and you can download the current version for free here. It will appear in a collection, Philosophical Foundations of Law and Neuroscience, edited by Michael Pardo and Dennis Patterson. In the piece, I argue that we usually focus on the philosophical questions raised by free will but that the law may have its own perspective rooted in the intentions and expectations of the law's crafters. Here's the abstract:

Abstract

Philosophers have long debated questions about free will, but their analyses obviously do not have the force of law. Whatever you think about free will, the law has its own perspective. Since cases and statutes say little directly on point, we turn, as we often must, to the intentions of those with authority to create law. The law’s crafters likely believed that we have souls that make choices unconstrained by the laws of physics. Such “soul-based libertarianism” conflicts with the modern scientific view that billions of particles have interacted since the beginning of time to make us take the precise actions we do in the precise circumstances we find ourselves. Since the law’s crafters aimed to punish evil-doing souls, they may never have intended to punish mechanisms like ourselves. 

Scholars such as Stephen Morse and Paul Litton, by contrast, have defended compatibilist interpretations of criminal law. They believe both moral and legal responsibility are consistent with mechanistic decision-making. But their interpretations of the law are largely grounded in controversial philosophical claims and should be distinguished from interpretations grounded in legal authority. Unless compatibilists can settle the philosophical debate to widespread satisfaction — an unlikely prospect given its centuries-long history — the law’s admittedly faint libertarian signals hold special weight. 

I argue that, from a legal perspective, the view that the criminal law was never intended to apply to mechanistic humans like ourselves is more plausible than the view that the law was intended to punish in a compatibilist fashion. Hence, if we focus on traditionally-recognized sources of legal authority, a plausible case can be made that our punishment policies are inconsistent with modern science and require updating.

"While You Were Sleepwalking: Science and Neurobiology of Sleep Disorders & the Enigma of Legal Responsibility of Violence During Parasomnia"

"While You Were Sleepwalking: Science and Neurobiology of Sleep Disorders & the Enigma of Legal Responsibility of Violence During Parasomnia" by Shreeya Popat and William Winslade has been published in the most recent issue of Neuroethics:

Abstract

In terms of medical science and legal responsibility, the sleep disorder category of parasomnias, chiefly REM sleep behavior disorder and somnambulism, pose an enigmatic dilemma. During an episode of parasomnia, individuals are neither awake nor aware, but their actions appear conscious. As these actions move beyond the innocuous, such as eating and blurting out embarrassing information, and enter the realm of rape and homicide, their degree of importance and relevance increases exponentially. Parasomnias that result in illegal activity, particularly violence, are puzzling phenomena for medicine and the law. Via a review of the pertinent medical literature, a general overview of the current scientific knowledge of parasomnias will be provided. Though this knowledge is far from complete, it can provide some neurobiological information about the nature of parasomnia, including conclusions about a sleepwalker’s level of intention as well as factors that predispose one to such episodes. Although a parasomniac’s complete lack of consciousness warrants acquittal from criminal liability, it does not exclude responsibility for subjecting oneself to exacerbating factors that result in these violent parasomnias. Individuals should be held accountable if they could be expected to control these factors. In addition, they should undergo appropriate treatment and management in order to prevent future parasomnia behaviors. Establishing a legal defense for parasomnia will prove difficult due to the strong potential for malingering, so specific criteria will be outlined in order to distinguish between true and fraudulent claims of crimes committed during parasomniac states.

PEBS Neuroethics Roundup (JHU)

Last Edition's Most Popular Article(s): Consciousness May Be a Lot Like Making Coffee, Say Scientists, Gizmodo In The Popular Press: How to Tell Whether A Child Might Become A Psychopath, As Early As Five Weeks Old, Quartz Neurotechnology Provides Near-Natural Sense of Touch, DARPA Creepy Relics of Phrenology, the Pseudoscience of Reading Head Bumps, Gizmodo Video: What is Consciousness, The Economist? Why Is That Dog Looking at Me?, New York Times How Safe Can Artificial Intelligence Be?, BBC News Ethics And Suicide: Are We Paying Attention To The Important Issues?, The Neuroethics Blog If You Think You Aren’t Dreaming At Night, You’re Probably Wrong, Quartz A Dying Young Woman’s Hope in Cryonics and a Future, New York Times Horizon: How Video Games Can Change Your Brain, BBC News It’s My Nervous System That’s Lazy, New York Times Why Americans Are So Obsessed With Pumpkin Spice Everything – According To Science, The Conversation This Mind-Controlled Prosthetic Robot Arm Lets You Actually Feel What It Touches, Quartz Sound Waves Used To Activate Brain Cells in a Worm, BBC News High-Tech Lights to Help Baby Sleep, or Students Stay Alert, New York Times Hacking the Inner Ear for VR—And for Science, Wired How Your Brain Decides Blame and Punishment, and How It Can Be Changed, Science Daily Three New Studies Converge On Promising New Target for Addiction Treatment, Science Daily   In the Academic Literature: GDNF-Transfected Macrophages Produce Potent Neuroprotective Effects in Parkinson's Disease Mouse Model, PLoS One Female Mice Ultrasonically Interact With Males during Courtship Displays, eLife Sonogenetics Is a Non-Invasive Approach to Activating Neurons in Caenorhabditis elegans, Nature Communications Neuroethics and Responsibility in Conducting Neuromarketing Research, Neuroethics A Young Scientists’ Perspective on DBS: A Plea for an International DBS Organization, Neuroethics ScaleS: An Optical Clearing Palette for Biological Imaging, Nature Neuroscience A Major Human White Matter Pathway Between Dorsal and Ventral Visual Cortex, Cerebral Cortex Labelling and Optical Erasure of Synaptic Memory Traces in the Motor Cortex, Nature Upcoming Events: 2015 International Neuroethics Society Meeting October 15-16 in Chicago, IL Early Registration Deadline: September 10   Sorting Brains Out A 2-day conference on the history of neuroscience and its broader social context, 1890-2015 at the Univ of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) on Friday-Saturday, Sept 18-19. The event is free and open to the public. Registration at [email protected] is appreciated, but not at all obligatory.  Talks include:   Reading the History of Adult Neurogenesis Backwards: When Did Sex/Gender Become Plastic? Monkeys, Mirrors, and Me: Gordon Gallup and the Study of Self-Recognition Normal Brains, Normal Behaviors? ADHD Diagnoses Show How Culture, Economy, and Pathology Are Entangled Why the Tortoise Wins the Race: Dual Process Theory and the Neoliberal Subject

Subscribe to our mailing list The Program in Ethics and Brain Sciences (PEBS) is a collaborative effort of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics and the Johns Hopkins Brain Sciences Institute . The goal of PEBS is to ensure that research in brain science proceeds with an informed understanding of ethical issues, and that philosophical and empirical analyses of the advances in brain research proceed with an informed understanding of the science.

"Neuroethics and Responsibility in Conducting Neuromarketing Research"

"Neuroethics and Responsibility in Conducting Neuromarketing Research" by Monica Diana Bercea Olteanu has been published in the most recent issue of Neuroethics:

Abstract

ver the last decade, academics and companies have shown an increased interest in brain studies and human cerebral functions related to consumer’s reactions to different stimuli. Therefore neuroethics emerged as a way to draw attention to ethical issues concerning different aspects of brain research. This review explores the environment of neuromarketing research in both business and academic areas from an ethical point of view. The paper focuses on the ethical issues involving subjects participating in neuroimaging studies, consumers that experience the effects of research results and also researchers that conduct such studies. Starting the analysis from the gaps in traditional marketing research, the paper provides information on ethics of neuromarketing research and its challenges and offers perspectives concerning the standards that should be implemented in order to allow the development of both neuroethics and neuromarketing under appropriate conditions.

"A Young Scientists’ Perspective on DBS: A Plea for an International DBS Organization"

"A Young Scientists’ Perspective on DBS: A Plea for an International DBS Organization" by Rowan P. Sommers, Roy Dings, Koen I. Neijenhuijs, Hannah Andringa, Sebastian Arts, Daphne van de Bult, Laura Klockenbusch, Emiel Wanningen, Leon C. de Bruin, and Pim F. G. Haselager has been published in the most recent issue of Neuroethics:

Abstract

Our think tank tasked by the Dutch Health Council, consisting of Radboud University Nijmegen Honours Academy students with various backgrounds, investigated the implications of Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) for psychiatric patients. During this investigation, a number of methodological, ethical and societal difficulties were identified. We consider these difficulties to be a reflection of a still fragmented field of research that can be overcome with improved organization and communication. To this effect, we suggest that it would be useful to found a centralized DBS organization. Such an organization makes it possible to 1) set up and maintain a repository, 2) facilitate DBS studies with a larger sample size, 3) improve communication amongst researchers, clinicians and ethical committees, and 4) improve communication between DBS experts and the public at large.

"Motivating Compliance Behavior Among Offenders: Procedural Justice or Deterrence?"

Recently published in SSRN (and forthcoming in Criminal Justice and Behavior):

 

"Motivating Compliance Behavior Among Offenders: Procedural Justice or Deterrence?"

 

KRISTINA MURPHY, Griffith University
BEN BRADFORD, University of Oxford - Centre for Criminology
JONATHAN JACKSON, London School of Economics & Political Science - Department of Methodology

Research shows that procedural justice can motivate compliance behavior through the mediating influence of either legitimacy or social identity. Yet few studies examine the relative importance of these two mediators in the same analysis. Using three waves of longitudinal survey data collected from 359 tax offenders we examine: (a) whether procedural justice is important to offenders’ decisions to comply with their future tax obligations over and above fear of sanctions; and (b) whether legitimacy and social identity processes mediate the relationship between procedural justice and compliance. Our results reveal that: (1) legitimacy mediates the effect of procedural justice on compliance; (2) social identity mediates the procedural justice/compliance relationship; (3) identity seems to matter slightly more than perceptions of legitimacy when predicting tax compliance; (4) perceived risk of sanction plays a small but counterproductive role in predicting tax compliance. We conclude that normative concerns dominate taxpayers’ compliance decisions. Our findings have implications for understanding compliance behavior, but also for conceptualizing why and how procedural justice can motivate such behavior.

PEBS Neuroethics Roundup (JHU)

Last Edition's Most Popular Article(s): Working Out Doesn’t Keep Your Brain Young: Study, TIME In The Popular Press: The Unexpected Science of Manipulating Neurons With Light, WIRED Is Our Identity in Intellect, Memory or Moral Character?, The Wall Street Journal Is Trauma In Our Genes? Ethical Implications Of Epigenetic Findings, The Neuroethics Blog I Hear Voices In My Head, But I’m Fine – Video, The Guardian Consciousness May Be a Lot Like Making Coffee, Say Scientists, Gizmodo Feeling Awe May Be Good for Our Health, Scientific American Marc Lewis: The Neuroscientist Who Believes Addiction Is Not A Disease, The Guardian Oliver Sacks Was A Boundless Explorer Of The Human Brain, NPR: Shots Brain Devices: Navigating Collaborations Between Industry, Government, And Researchers, The Neuroethics Blog How Sound Shaped The Evolution Of Your Brain, NPR: Shots Are Women Better Tasters Than Men?, NPR: The Salt First Demonstration of Photonic Intelligence, MIT Technology Review How Shows Like 'Will & Grace' And 'Black-ish' Can Change Your Brain, NPR: Codeswitch Will Smith's New Movie "Concussion" Terrifies The NFL. Here's The Trailer., Vox Oliver Sacks, The Brain And God, The Conversation Sperm Whale Clans Speak Different Dialects, Gizmodo If Fish Is Brain Food, Can Fish Oil Pills Boost Brains, Too?, NPR: The Salt In the Academic Literature: Body Maps In The Infant Brain, Trends in Cognitive Neuroscience Processing Of False Belief Passages During Natural Story Comprehension: An fMRI Study, Human Brain Mapping Precursors to Morality in Development As a Complex Interplay Between Neural, Socioenvironmental, and Behavioral Facets, PNAS The Rational Adolescent: Strategic Information Processing During Decision Making Revealed By Eye Tracking, Cognitive Development Efficacy Of Cumulative High-Frequency rTMS On Freezing Of Gait In Parkinson’s Disease, Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience Baseline Striatal Functional Connectivity as a Predictor of Response to Antipsychotic Drug Treatment, American Journal of Psychiatry Upcoming Events: 2015 International Neuroethics Society Meeting October 15-16 in Chicago, IL Early Registration Deadline: September 10   Sorting Brains Out A 2-day conference on the history of neuroscience and its broader social context, 1890-2015 at the Univ of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) on Friday-Saturday, Sept 18-19. The event is free and open to the public. Registration at [email protected] is appreciated, but not at all obligatory.  Talks include:   Reading the History of Adult Neurogenesis Backwards: When Did Sex/Gender Become Plastic? Monkeys, Mirrors, and Me: Gordon Gallup and the Study of Self-Recognition Normal Brains, Normal Behaviors? ADHD Diagnoses Show How Culture, Economy, and Pathology Are Entangled Why the Tortoise Wins the Race: Dual Process Theory and the Neoliberal Subject

Subscribe to our mailing list The Program in Ethics and Brain Sciences (PEBS) is a collaborative effort of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics and the Johns Hopkins Brain Sciences Institute . The goal of PEBS is to ensure that research in brain science proceeds with an informed understanding of ethical issues, and that philosophical and empirical analyses of the advances in brain research proceed with an informed understanding of the science.

Memory Dampening (In German)

Here's a link to a Die Zeit article by Stefanie Kara on drugs to dampen traumatic memories. (Now I just need one of those pills to translate German to English, so I'll know what my quote means.)

"Public Discourse on the Biology of Alcohol Addiction: Implications for Stigma, Self-Control, Essentialism, and Coercive Policies in Pregnancy"

"Public Discourse on the Biology of Alcohol Addiction: Implications for Stigma, Self-Control, Essentialism, and Coercive Policies in Pregnancy" by Eric Racine, Emily Bell, Natalie Zizzo, and Courtney Green has been published in the most recent issue of Neuroethics:

Abstract

International media have reported cases of pregnant women who have had their children apprehended by social services, or who were incarcerated or forced into treatment programs based on a history of substance use or lack of adherence to addiction treatment programs. Public discourse on the biology of addiction has been criticized for generating stigma and a diminished perception of self-control in individuals with an addiction, potentially contributing to coercive approaches and criminalization of women who misuse substances during pregnancy. We explored whether this is the case based on literature from social psychology, ethics, addiction research, science communication, and philosophy. The literature shows that the relationship between public discourse on biological aspects of addiction and issues such as stigma and perceptions of diminished self-control are unclear, largely due to the complexity of these phenomena. However, concerns about the biological approach are nevertheless legitimate given the broader social and policy context of women’s health.

"Personality and Blood Types Revisited: Case of Morality"

"Personality and Blood Types Revisited: Case of Morality" by Mladen Pecujlija, Gordana Misic-Pavkov, and Maja Popovic has been published in the most recent issue of Neuroethics:

Abstract

Although a large body of research exists concerning connections between personality traits and blood types, no studies can be found within the literature on the links between morality and one’s blood type. We have conducted research examining whether blood type has any impact on the degree to which moral foundations, according to Haidt (Science 316:998–1002, 2007), are observable in an individual. Our study focused on 240 adult male and female subjects, with an average age of 43.47 years; each group was based on the ABO blood type system and consisted of 60 subjects in total. Based on the data obtained, we can conclude that there is a connection between the Harm and Purity moral foundations and blood group.

"Grit and Legal Education"

Recently published in SSRN (and forthcoming in Pace Law Review):

 

"Grit and Legal Education"

 

EMILY ZIMMERMAN, Drexel University Thomas R. Kline School of Law
LEAH BROGAN, Drexel University

Although research indicates that grit predicts successful performance in a variety of contexts, grit is underexplored in the context of legal education. We investigated the relationship between grit and law school grade point average (GPA) among recent law school graduates. Contrary to expectations, a statistically significant correlation did not emerge between grit and law school GPA. However, average grit scores of women and men did significantly differ, with women reporting higher overall grit scores than men. Female and male participants’ law school GPAs did not significantly differ. This article discusses our research project and the questions regarding legal education that our findings raise. We also identify areas for further research regarding grit, legal education, and law practice.

Hypnotism as a Defense to Murder

In the New York Times in 1895! (hat tip: Alexa Carrero)

"Can’t We All Disagree More Constructively? Moral Foundations, Moral Reasoning, and Political Disagreement"

"Can’t We All Disagree More Constructively? Moral Foundations, Moral Reasoning, and Political Disagreement" by Hanno Sauer has been published in the most recent issue of Neuroethics:

Abstract

Can’t we all disagree more constructively? Recent years have seen a dramatic increase in political partisanship: the 2013 shutdown of the US government as well as an ever more divided political landscape in Europe illustrate that citizens and representatives of developed nations fundamentally disagree over virtually every significant issue of public policy, from immigration to health care, from the regulation of financial markets to climate change, from drug policies to medical procedures (Koleva et al. Journal of Research in Personality 46:184–194, 2012). The emerging field of political psychology brings the tools of moral psychology to bear on this issue. It suggests that the main conflict shaping politics today can be explained in terms of people’s moral foundations (Graham et al. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96(5):1029–1046, 2009; Haidt 2012; Graham et al. PLOS One 7(12):1–13, (2012); cf. also Rai and Fiske Psychological Review 118:57–75, 2011): progressive liberals, it is argued, view society as consisting of separate individuals with differing values and life plans, whereas conservatives rely on a thicker notion of political morality that includes traditions, communities, and values of purity (Haidt and Graham Social Justice Research 20:98–116, 2007). In this paper, I explore the normative implications of this theory. In particular, I will argue that its proponents take it to support an asymmetry of understanding: if deep political disagreements reflect differences in people’s moral foundations, and these disagreements cannot be rationally resolved, then overcoming them makes it necessary to acknowledge the moral foundations of the other side’s political outlook. But conservatives, the theory suggests, already do acknowledge all of the liberal moral foundations, and not vice versa. To overcome partisanship and the resulting political deadlock, then, it seems to be up to liberals to move closer towards the conservative side, and not vice versa. I wish to analyze what the argument for this asymmetry is and whether it holds up. In the end, I shall argue that the available evidence does support an asymmetry, but that it is the opposite of what Moral Foundations theorists think it is. There is such an asymmetry - but its burden falls on the conservative side.