Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Bioethics (1)
- Brain (1)
- Criminal law (1)
- Criminal responsibility (1)
- Decision making (1)
-
- Deterrence and incapacitation (1)
- EEG (1)
- Emotion (1)
- Evidence (1)
- FMRI (1)
- Forensic psychiatry (1)
- Injury (1)
- Judges (1)
- Judging (1)
- Judicial discretion (1)
- Justifications for blame and punishment (1)
- Law and neuroscience (1)
- Lie detection (1)
- Memory (1)
- Neuroethics (1)
- Neurolaw (1)
- Nonpaternalistic and paternalistic rehabilitation (1)
- Psychology (1)
- Psychopathy (1)
- Punishment (1)
- Remorse and forensic practice (1)
- Restitution (1)
- Retribution (1)
- Tort liability (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Medicine and Health Sciences
Law And Neuroscience: Recommendations Submitted To The President's Bioethics Commission, Owen D. Jones, Richard J. Bonnie, B. J. Casey, Andre Davis, David L. Faigman, Morris Hoffman, Read Montague, Stephen J. Morse, Marcus E. Raichle, Jennifer A. Richeson, Elizabeth Scott, Laurence Steinberg, Kim Taylor-Thompson, Anthony Wagner, Gideon Yaffe
Law And Neuroscience: Recommendations Submitted To The President's Bioethics Commission, Owen D. Jones, Richard J. Bonnie, B. J. Casey, Andre Davis, David L. Faigman, Morris Hoffman, Read Montague, Stephen J. Morse, Marcus E. Raichle, Jennifer A. Richeson, Elizabeth Scott, Laurence Steinberg, Kim Taylor-Thompson, Anthony Wagner, Gideon Yaffe
All Faculty Scholarship
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 …
Commentary: Reflections On Remorse, Stephen J. Morse
Commentary: Reflections On Remorse, Stephen J. Morse
All Faculty Scholarship
This commentary on Zhong et al. begins by addressing the definition of remorse. It then primarily focuses on the relation between remorse and various justifications for punishment commonly accepted in Anglo-American jurisprudence and suggests that remorse cannot be used in a principled way in sentencing. It examines whether forensic psychiatrists have special expertise in evaluating remorse and concludes that they do not. The final section is a pessimistic meditation on sentencing disparities, which is a striking finding of Zhong et al.