Neuroscience-based Psychiatric Assessments of Criminal Responsibility: Beyond Self-Report?

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 29 (3):446-458 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Many legal systems have an insanity defense, which means that although a person has committed a crime, she is not held criminally responsible for the act. A challenge with regard to these assessments is that forensic psychiatrists have to rely to a considerable extent on the defendant's self-report. Could neuroscience be a way to make these evaluations more objective? The current value of neuroimaging in insanity assessments will be examined. The author argues that neuroscience can be valuable for diagnosing neurological illnesses, rather than psychiatric disorders. Next, he discusses to what extent neurotechnological 'mind reading' techniques, if they would become available in the future, could be useful to get beyond self-report in forensic psychiatry.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Insanity and responsibility.Herbert Fingarette - 1972 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 15 (1-4):6 – 29.
Responsible Brains: Neuroscience, Law, and Human Culpability.William Hirstein, Katrina L. Sifferd & Tyler K. Fagan - 2018 - New York, NY, USA: MIT Press. Edited by Katrina Sifferd & Tyler Fagan.
Neurolaw: Neuroscience, Ethics, and Law. Review Essay.Gerben Meynen - 2014 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 17 (4):819-829.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-06-03

Downloads
16 (#886,588)

6 months
4 (#800,606)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Gerben Meynen
VU University Amsterdam