Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Law and NeuroscienceCurrent Legal Issues Volume 13$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Michael Freeman

Print publication date: 2011

Print ISBN-13: 9780199599844

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: May 2011

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199599844.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 17 December 2018

Neuroscience and Ideology: Why Science Can Never Supply a Complete Answer for Adolescent Immaturity

Neuroscience and Ideology: Why Science Can Never Supply a Complete Answer for Adolescent Immaturity

(p.231) 13 Neuroscience and Ideology: Why Science Can Never Supply a Complete Answer for Adolescent Immaturity
Law and Neuroscience

June Carbone

Oxford University Press

For those who study adolescent development and the transition to adulthood, the lure of innovations in neuroscience is considerable. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRIs) and CT scans offer the illusion of peering into the teen brain and discovering what many have long suspected — while all the parts are there, they are not necessarily fully connected. Innovations in neuroscience and adolescent decision-making say more about our existing decision-making processes than they do about the adolescents who are the subject of the decisions. This chapter argues that to resolve the issues about the role of neuroscience, we need to question the framework in which it arises. That is, the increasing complexity of scientific determinations raises issues of institutional capacity. Recognizing innovations in the science of adolescent development may change not so much our view of adolescence as the calculus underlying institutional functions. The chapter begins by describing the ‘lure of neuroscience’, that is, the promise and limitations of the scientific advances, comparing legal decision-making capacity in individual cases versus broader matters of constitutional doctrine or public policy, analysing the recent US Supreme Court decisions on the juvenile death penalty in such terms, and assessing the role of neuroscience in the different possible outcomes of that case.

Keywords:   neuroscience, law, institutional capacity, adolescent development, juvenile death penalty

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .