Public Bioethics Event: The Neuroscience of Capital Punishment
At present, the US Supreme Court has no categorical exemption from the death penalty for the severely mentally ill. Many have argued in favor of creating one, given that such defendants arguably suffer from at least the same degree of impaired adaptive functioning and understanding of the law as intellectually disabled or juvenile defendants – who are exempted for these very reasons. Yet existing protections for the severely mentally ill in the form of competency tests and the extremely narrow insanity defense are insufficient due to the stigma and misconceptions of mental illnesses impacting juries and legislators alike.
Recently, there have been renewed attempts to pass bills creating such an exemption in some states that retain use of the death penalty. This has met with varying -- mostly limited -- degrees of success. And while there has been significant in-principle support in the academic community, the legal literature often glosses over potential problems that might arise from its actual implementation – in particular, with regards to evidence admitted in support of such claims and the roles of neuroscience and forensic psychiatry.
This event invites three panelists with expertise in the relevant fields of law, psychiatry, psychology and neuroscience to weigh in on interdisciplinary questions that may prove key to the success of reforms in the area. These include the potential of neuroscientific evidence in aiding in the definition of the types and severity of conditions covered by such an exemption during legislation and its application at trial, its interaction with expert testimony and evidentiary issues, and the broader implications of its use on risk assessment and crime control.
Видео Public Bioethics Event: The Neuroscience of Capital Punishment канала HMS Center for Bioethics
Recently, there have been renewed attempts to pass bills creating such an exemption in some states that retain use of the death penalty. This has met with varying -- mostly limited -- degrees of success. And while there has been significant in-principle support in the academic community, the legal literature often glosses over potential problems that might arise from its actual implementation – in particular, with regards to evidence admitted in support of such claims and the roles of neuroscience and forensic psychiatry.
This event invites three panelists with expertise in the relevant fields of law, psychiatry, psychology and neuroscience to weigh in on interdisciplinary questions that may prove key to the success of reforms in the area. These include the potential of neuroscientific evidence in aiding in the definition of the types and severity of conditions covered by such an exemption during legislation and its application at trial, its interaction with expert testimony and evidentiary issues, and the broader implications of its use on risk assessment and crime control.
Видео Public Bioethics Event: The Neuroscience of Capital Punishment канала HMS Center for Bioethics
Показать
Комментарии отсутствуют
Информация о видео
Другие видео канала
Bioethical Reflections in Honor of Dan Brock | Session ThreeEthical and Workforce Considerations in Abortion Care ProvisionRacism, Inclusion, and Justice: Interrogating BioethicsThe Ethics of Innovation in Personalized Experimental TherapeuticsIf Architecture Influences Health Outcomes, How Should Healthcare Systems Respond?The 2006 George W. Gay Lecture | Paul FarmerThe Ethics of Health Care Reform at Harvard Medical School Center for BioethicsOrganizational Ethics Consortia: Racially Concordant CareBehind Bars Conference Keynote Address by Danielle AllenEthical Considerations in Surgical Innovation, Harvard Surgical Ethics ConferenceBlood Lines: Fatherhood, faith and love in the time of stem cells by Paul McLeanBioethical Reflections in Honor of Dan Brock | Session OneSecuring Workers' Health during COVID-19: Ethics consultation for essential industriesNeuroethics Seminar: Innovation in NeurosurgeryBeyond Racism: Seizing Your Moment in Time and Building ForwardThe Research Rigor, Reproducibility, and Responsibility Effort at HMSBioethical Reflections in Honor of Dan Brock | Final ThoughtsEthical Implications of New Biomedical Technologies in NeuroscienceBusting Clots on Your Behalf? The Ethics of Presumed Consent to Thrombolytics in Acute StrokeHow Non-medical Factors Affect Surgical Decision-making and Patient CareEthics of Hospital Transfers in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Experience and Lessons Learned