Elucidating the pathophysiology of delirium

05-Feb-2020 06:51

This article surveys the neuroethics and neurolegal literature on the use of forensic neuroimaging within the courtroom.

Next, the related literature within medical anthropology and science and technology studies is reviewed to show how debates about forensic neuroimaging reflect cultural tensions about attitudes regarding the self, mental illness, and medical expertise.

Yet mainstream legal academics have often greeted it with ambivalence.

They have not predictably viewed it as a resource for addressing questions within their substantive fields; it is often treated as a novel academic pastime rather than an instrument for addressing practical problems.

We conclude that it may reflect the persistence of a rationalist tendency in law, and an incomplete grasp of the benefits of understanding these essential constituents of human cognition and motivation.

We contend that the best answer to such resurgent doubt is to demonstrate the pragmatic potential of this scholarship.

The odds that an offender with relatively low anterior cingulate activity would be rearrested were approximately double that of an offender with high activity in this region, holding constant other observed risk factors.

These results suggest a potential neurocognitive biomarker for persistent antisocial behavior.

The present study evaluated this view by examining the extent to which 109 incarcerated offenders with varying degrees of psychopathy could distinguish between moral and conventional transgressions relative to each other and to nonincarcerated healthy controls.Notwithstanding the breadth of its epistemological challenges, law and emotions scholarship can contribute to the familiar normative work of the law—revising and strengthening existing doctrine, improving decisionmaking, and informing new legal policies.Moreover, it can facilitate the less familiar but nevertheless valuable task of using law to improve people’s affective lives.Traumatic brain injury (TBI), along with its acute and chronic sequelae, has emerged as a focus of neuroethical issues, such as informed consent for treatment and research, diagnostic and prognostic uncertainties, and the subjectivity of interpretation of data.The law has also more frequently considered TBI in criminal settings for exculpation, mitigation and sentencing purposes and in tort and administrative law for personal injury, disability and worker's compensation cases.

The present study evaluated this view by examining the extent to which 109 incarcerated offenders with varying degrees of psychopathy could distinguish between moral and conventional transgressions relative to each other and to nonincarcerated healthy controls.Notwithstanding the breadth of its epistemological challenges, law and emotions scholarship can contribute to the familiar normative work of the law—revising and strengthening existing doctrine, improving decisionmaking, and informing new legal policies.Moreover, it can facilitate the less familiar but nevertheless valuable task of using law to improve people’s affective lives.Traumatic brain injury (TBI), along with its acute and chronic sequelae, has emerged as a focus of neuroethical issues, such as informed consent for treatment and research, diagnostic and prognostic uncertainties, and the subjectivity of interpretation of data.The law has also more frequently considered TBI in criminal settings for exculpation, mitigation and sentencing purposes and in tort and administrative law for personal injury, disability and worker's compensation cases.In this essay, I consider the liabilities and potential of techniques that measure human brain activity.