female, 20.
psychology, neuroscience, anatomy, ballet, tea, photography, cats, other cool stuff.
Ask me anything
psychology, neuroscience, anatomy, ballet, tea, photography, cats, other cool stuff.
Ask me anything
Law and Neuroscience in the United States, Jones & Shen [via].
So maybe people “at the courtroom, regulatory, and policy levels” should be chiming in about how these challenges will be handled. If the science is not ready and evidentiary standards aren’t met because of that, is all we can do wait until the scientific community agrees (good-luck!) that whatever neuro evidence does meet the standard… and then address the backlog of how to deal with it? Believe it or not, some legal people disagree. I’ll get to that later.
What I’m sayin’ is this integration should be talked about beyond the realms of neuroscientists and legal scholar’s offices and publications. Seeing how the whole forensic psych integration went down (in terms of culpability based on mental illness or forced medication and punishment issues), I have a bleak, but realistic (and secretly enthusiastic/optimistic) view of how this will pan out.
This Jones & Shen paper is but one chapter in a series looking at neuroscience and law in 18 other countries. If you missed it, I gave a neurolaw play by play of how those countries…
(via psydoctor8)
