2,179 research outputs found

    The Right to Bodily Integrity and the Rehabilitation of Offenders Through Medical Interventions : A Reply to Thomas Douglas

    Get PDF
    Peer reviewedPublisher PD

    Introduction

    Get PDF

    The Epistemic Argument Against Retributivism

    Get PDF
    Peer reviewedPostprin

    Neurodoping in Chess to Enhance Mental Stamina

    Get PDF
    Peer reviewedPostprin

    Moral Responsibility Scepticism, Epistemic Considerations and Responsibility for Health

    Get PDF
    I am grateful to Gabriel De Marco and Ben Davies for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this chapter

    Legal Responsibility : Psychopathy, a Case Study

    Get PDF
    Peer reviewedPostprin

    Neuroscience, Criminal Sentencing, and Human Rights

    Full text link
    This Article discusses ways in which neuroscience should inform criminal sentencing in the future. Specifically, it compares the ethical permissibility of traditional forms of punishment, such as incarceration, on the one hand, and rehabilitative “neurointerventions” on the other. Rehabilitative neurointerventions are interventions that aim directly to modify brain activity in order to reduce reoffending. Various jurisdictions are already using techniques that could be classed as neurointerventions, and research suggests that, potentially, an even wider range of rehabilitative neurointerventions may be developed. This Article examines the role of human rights (in particular, the moral right to mental integrity and the legal right against degrading treatment) as a constraint on the state’s use of neurointerventions. It also discusses the extent to which traditional forms of punishment, such as incarceration, interfere with the right to mental integrity
    • 

    corecore