Neuroscience and the Law

The current American Journal of Psychiatry Online includes a review, by Carl P. Malmquist, M.D., of Neuroscience and the Law: Brain, Mind, and the Scales of Justice (Brent Garland, ed.) (Dana Press 2004). From the review:

Four questions are posed for the use of neuroscience in litigation: 1) Does the information meet legal admissibility standards (Frye and Daubert standards)? 2) If admissible, are there other reasons that should preclude courts from using the information? (Should a court allow testimony that a person has a superior memory? Those opposed argue this invades the province of the jury, and those in favor argue it is similar to testimony about a person’s vision.) 3) Should the willingness or refusal to take neuroscientific tests be introduced? 4) Should a witness, or any person involved in the litigation process, be compelled to be tested and, if so, under what circumstances?