Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

Limitations using neuroimaging to reconstruct mental state after a crime

*Corresponding author for this work
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Sustainable Development Goals

  • SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well
  • SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
    SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Abstract

Neuroimaging offers great potential to clinicians and researchers for a host of mental and physical conditions. The use of imaging has been trumpeted for forensic psychiatric and psychological evaluations to allow greater insight into the relationship between the brain and behavior. The results of imaging certainly can be used to inform clinical diagnoses; however, there continue to be limitations in using neuroimaging for insanity cases due to limited scientific backing for how neuroimaging can inform retrospective evaluations of mental state. In making this case, this paper reviews the history of the insanity defense and explains how the use of neuroimaging is not an effective way of improving the reliability of insanity defense evaluations.

Publication Information

Output type

Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English (US)

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 694-701 (8 pages)

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics (Volume 30, Issue 4)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 10/01/2021

Publication status

Published - 10/01/2021

ISSN

0963-1801

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 85118512972
  • PubMed: 34702412

Publication metrics

Metrics

Scopus
citations
Fractional count
2
Fractional count
0.50
Fractional count
2
Fractional count
0.50
Fractional count
2
Fractional count
1

PlumX, opens in new tab

Captures
8
Citation count
6