47 research outputs found
Judging in the Genomic era: judgesâ genetic knowledge, confidence and need for training
Genetic information is increasingly used in many contexts, including health, insurance, policing and sentencing â with numerous potential benefits and risks. Protecting from the related risks requires updates to laws and procedures by justice systems. These updates depend to a large extent on what the key stakeholders â the judiciary â know and think about the use of genetic information. This study used a battery of 25 genetic knowledge items to collect data from 73 supreme court judges from the same country (Romania) on their knowledge of genetic information. Their responses were compared with those of two other groups: lawyers (but not judges; N = 94) and nonlawyers (N = 116) from the same country. The data were collected at approximately the same time from the three groups. The judgesâ results were also compared to the results obtained from a general population data collection (N = 5310). The results showed that: 1) judges had overall better knowledge of genetics than the other groups, but their knowledge was uneven across different genetic concepts; 2) judges were overall more confident in their knowledge than the other two groups, but their confidence was quite low; and 3) the correlation between knowledge and confidence was moderate for judges, weak for lawyers and not significant for non-lawyers. Finally, 100% of the judges agreed that information on gene-environment processes should be included in judgesâ training. Increasing genetic expertise of the justice stakeholders is an important step towards achieving adequate legal protection against genetic data misuse
Determining the duration of Aphis glycines (Hemiptera: Aphididae) induced susceptibility effect in soybean
Non food-related risk factors of campylobacteriosis in Canada: a matched case-control study
When a child dies of heatstroke after a parent or caretaker unknowingly leaves the child in a car: How does it happen and is it a crime?
Perceptions of nature, nurture and behaviour
Trying to separate out nature and nurture as explanations for behaviour, as in classic genetic studies of twins and families, is now said to be both impossible and unproductive. In practice the nature-nurture model persists as a way of framing discussion on the causes of behaviour in genetic research papers, as well as in the media and lay debate. Social and environmental theories of crime have been dominant in criminology and in public policy while biological theories have been seen as outdated and discredited. Recently, research into genetic variations associated with aggressive and antisocial behaviour has received more attention in the media. This paper explores ideas on the role of nature and nurture in violent and antisocial behaviour through interviews and open-ended questionnaires among lay publics. There was general agreement that everybodyâs behaviour is influenced to varying degrees by both genetic and environmental factors but deterministic accounts of causation, except in exceptional circumstances, were rejected. Only an emphasis on nature was seen as dangerous in its consequences, for society and for individuals themselves. Whereas academic researchers approach the debate from their disciplinary perspectives which may or may not engage with practical and policy issues, the key issue for the public was what sort of explanations of behaviour will lead to the best outcomes for all concerned