Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (3):475-481 (2012)
Abstract |
The insanity defense presents many difficult questions for the legal system. It attracts attention beyond its practical significance (it is seldom used successfully) because it goes to the heart of the concept of legal responsibility. “Not guilty by reason of insanity” generally requires that as a result of mental illness the defendant was unable to distinguish right from wrong at the time of the crime. The many difficult and complex questions presented by the insanity defense have led some in the legal community to hope that neuroscience might help resolve some of these problems, but that hope is not likely to be realized
|
Keywords | Insanity defense Criminal responsibility Law NGRI (not guilty by reason of insanity) Responsibility and neuroscience Guilty but mentally ill Competency to stand trial Irresistible impulse Temporary insanity “Right from wrong” test |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
ISBN(s) | |
DOI | 10.1007/s11948-012-9390-7 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
On the Relevance of Neuroscience to Criminal Responsibility.Nicole A. Vincent - 2010 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 4 (1):77-98.
The Ethics of Neuroscience and the Neuroscience of Ethics: A Phenomenological–Existential Approach.Christopher J. Frost & Augustus R. Lumia - 2012 - Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (3):457-474.
Citations of this work BETA
The Ethics of Neuroscience and the Neuroscience of Ethics: A Phenomenological–Existential Approach.Christopher J. Frost & Augustus R. Lumia - 2012 - Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (3):457-474.
Editors' Overview: Neuroethics: Many Voices and Many Stories.Michael Kalichman, Dena Plemmons & Stephanie J. Bird - 2012 - Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (3):423-432.
Similar books and articles
Insanity and Responsibility.Herbert Fingarette - 1972 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 15 (1-4):6 – 29.
Wild Beasts and Idle Humours: The Insanity Defense From Antiquity to the Present.Daniel N. Robinson - 1996 - Harvard Univ. Press.
Proposition: A Personality Disorder May Nullify Responsibility for a Criminal Act.Robert Kinscherff - 2010 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (4):745-759.
On the Relevance of Neuroscience to Criminal Responsibility.Nicole A. Vincent - 2010 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 4 (1):77-98.
The Insanity Plea: Szaszian Ethics and Epistemology.Lee S. Weinberg & Richard E. Vatz - 1982 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 3 (3):417-433.
Failed Agency and the Insanity Defence.Steve Matthews - 2004 - International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 27:413-424.
The Moral Foundations of the Insanity Defense.Thomas R. Litwack - 1984 - Criminal Justice Ethics 3 (1):12-19.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2012-10-01
Total views
78 ( #150,231 of 2,520,893 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #270,438 of 2,520,893 )
2012-10-01
Total views
78 ( #150,231 of 2,520,893 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #270,438 of 2,520,893 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads