General Information
editGroup Members- Pat Hyland, Rachel Booth, Christina Han
The topic of our article is Neurolaw, which is a broad term encompassing scientific, ethical, and practical roles of neuroscience and how they relate the legal system. Our emphasis will be on Neurolaw as it relates to the United States, however references will be made to other nations' legal systems as necessary. For instance, this could include notable examples of neuroscience being used in case law, and of course any major scientific advancements. Unlike most articles in the Wikipedia Neuroscience Category, this article will cover both hard science aspects (neuroscience) and social science aspects (politics & law). The article's categories will balance both of these areas in order to give a complete overview of neurolaw. The following topics reflect initial research on neurolaw, and are the general categories which the article will cover
Division of Work
Each section has a primary writer who is most responsible for it. However, in order to ensure a cohesive article, we are all going to work on each section so that it does not appear quickly pasted together. The primary editors of each section are listed below.
Anticipated Division of Article
editUnderlying Science of Neurolaw
Neurolaw is inherently related to modern technologies that can scan and analyze the human brain. This section will offer an overview of such technological advances, including the MRI, fMRI, and EEG that have inspired an abundance of potential applications and have caused a need for updated laws and regulations. Because Wikipedia already contains articles for these technologies, this section will describe how they specifically relate to neurolaw, rather than repeating information that the community would likely delete. This section will provide enough background information about the underlying science so that readers can better understand subsequent sections.
(Primary editors- Christina Han & Pat Hyland)
Ongoing Research
Ongoing research will discuss the cutting edge advancements in neurolaw. This section will complement the preceding "Underlying Science" section, but will provide more information on future applications rather than established uses. Depending on the resources available, we will continue to evaluate whether these should be two distinct sections. The following is some of the preliminary research we have conducted. Most recently scientist and lawyers at Vanderbilt have delved into issues of neurolaw. Dr. Owen Jones, a professor of both law and biological sciences received MacArther Grant in 2007 enabling him to conduct "The Law and Neuroscience Project." “Harm and Punishment” is their first experiment observing the brain’s reaction to imposing punishment. They are working to discover the correlation between how common folk judge the severity of punishment to how the legal system has organized punishment and have discovered thus far through the analysis of an fMRI scan that decision makers are more likely to rely on emotion rather than reason when choosing punishment.
(Primary editor- Rachel Booth)
Criminal Law and Neuroscience
Progress in neuroscience has opened a new realm of possibilities to aid in the analysis of criminal law. However, litigation and neuroscience professionals must correlate to define a consistent method to apply the new technology. A considerable number of criminal convictions have comprised of those suffering from brain damage, insanity, and addiction. This section of the article is striving to assert an ethical and accurate display on the discretion that determines criminal accountability and to fully analyze the court’s decision-making process, as access to progressive scientific information becomes available, as well as its affect on the jurors.
(Primary editor- Rachel Booth)
In Relation to the Military
With the advent of novel technological innovations such as the fMRI and the EEG, both the legal system and the military has begun to anticipate specific uses for such neuroscience research. The United States military, for instance, is already actively using brain-imaging technologies to facilitate interrogation methods by analyzing cognitive activity that occurs in deception. However, because these approaches are still innovatory and early in development, the results and the consequences of those results can be questioned on their validity and legitimacy. This section will discuss current and potential military applications of neuroscience research, as well as the laws and controls needed to regulate the prevalence of such applications.
(Primary editor- Christina Han)
Brain Enhancing Drugs
Anticipated developments in neuroscience show potential for the development of brain-enhancing drugs. Analogous to how anabolic steroids increase muscle mass of an athlete, these drugs could artificially enhance the memory, intelligence, and attention of those use them. While society already has access to drugs such as caffeine and Adderall, brain-enhancing drugs could be significantly more effective at modifying brain function. This has created ethical questions relating to neurolaw regarding the legalization of these drugs and their role in society, particularly in academic settings.
(Primary editor- Pat Hyland)
Preliminary References
edithttp://neuro.bcm.edu/eagleman/papers/Eagleman_NeuroscienceandLaw_HoustonLawyer.pdf
http://www.lawneuro.org/Networks.aspx
http://www.law.com/jsp/lawtechnologynews/PubArticleLTN.jsp?id=1202427455426&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1
http://eaglemanlab.net/papers/EaglemanCorreroSingh_Neuroscience%20and%20Drug%20Policy.pdf