New Neuroscience vs. Old Doctrine

Couldn’t join us for the event? Check out some of the panelists’ slide presentations below!

Description

The criminal law often sees love and passion turned into violence. How does this happen? And how should law respond? Many doctrines, most notably the “heat of passion” defense – which historically has been used disproportionately to excuse the crimes of men against women – rely on a distinction between defendants who acted “emotionally” instead of “rationally.” But modern neuroscience has debunked the idea that reason and emotion are two entirely different mental states. This panel explored how law should respond to this neuroscientific challenge to long-held doctrine.

Panelists

This event was free and open to the public.

Learn More!

Slide Presentations

Part of the Project on Law and Applied Neuroscience, a collaboration between the Center for Law, Brain & Behavior at Massachusetts General Hospital and the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School.