The Impact of Neuroscience and Genetics on the Law: A Recent Italian Case (original) (raw)

Abstract

The use of genetic testing and neuroscientific evidence in legal trials raises several issues. Often their interpretation is controversial: the same evidence can be used to sustain both the prosecution’s and defense’s argument. A recent Italian case confirms such concerns and stresses other relevant related questions.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Feresin, E. 2009. Lighter sentence for murderer with ‘bad genes’. Nature. doi:10.1038/news.2009.1050.
  2. Petrini, C. 2010. Ethical, legal, and social implications of behavioral genetics. AJOB Neuroscience 1(4): 19.
    Article Google Scholar
  3. Appelbaum, P.S. 2005. Behavioral genetics and the punishment of crime. Law & Psychiatry 56: 25–27.
    Google Scholar
  4. Green, J., and J. Cohen. 2004. For the law, neuroscience changes nothing and everything. Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 359(1451): 1775–1785.
    Article Google Scholar
  5. Caspi, A., J. McClay, T.E. Moffitt, J. Mill, J. Martin, I.W. Craig, A.M. Taylor, and R. Poulton. 2002. Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children. Science 297(5582): 851–854.
    Article Google Scholar
  6. Hart, H.L.A. 1968. Punishment and responsibility. Oxford: Clarendon.
    Google Scholar
  7. Mykitiuk, R., M. Pioro, L. Finker, and J. Nisker. 2011. The potential for misusing “genetic predisposition” in Canadian courts and tribunals. CMAJ 183(14): 1601–1604.
    Article Google Scholar
  8. Rose, S. 1997. Lifelines: Biology beyond determinism. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Google Scholar
  9. Crawford, M.B. 2010. The limits of neuro-talk. In Scientific and philosophical perspectives in Neuroethics, ed. J. Giordano and B. Gordijn, 355–369. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Chapter Google Scholar
  10. Vincent, N.O. 2010. On the relevance of neuroscience to criminal responsibility. Criminal Law and Philosophy 4: 77–98.
    Article Google Scholar
  11. Bennett, M., and P. Hacker. 2003. Philosophical foundations of neuroscience. Oxford: Blackwell.
    Google Scholar
  12. Tovino, S.A. 2007. Functional neuroimaging and the law: Trends and directions for future scholarship. The American Journal of Bioethics 7(9): 44–56.
    Article Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Biogem Genetic Research Institute, Via Camporeale, 83031, Ariano Irpino, AV, Italy
    M. Farisco
  2. Italian National Institute of Health, Via Giano della Bella 34, 00162, Rome, Italy
    C. Petrini

Authors

  1. M. Farisco
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  2. C. Petrini
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence toM. Farisco.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Farisco, M., Petrini, C. The Impact of Neuroscience and Genetics on the Law: A Recent Italian Case.Neuroethics 5, 317–319 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-012-9152-x

Download citation

Keywords