"Judge Gertner emphasized the importance of objective neuroscience." What evidence establishes a causal connection between neuroscience and crime? In 1965 Daniel Patrick Moynihan published his report about youth from single parent homes. In 1995 John Di'Iulio described a large group of 7- to 10-year-old boys who were "fatherless, Godless, and jobless." Scholars and academics refuse to address this known source of violence and crime. Neuroscience is interesting. How does it prevent crime? Robert T. Kinscherff [. . .] said there is a need [to understand] conditions that lead to youth delinquency. [and government] should be 'smart on crime.'” He cites the Justice Dept, which has little jurisdiction over violent crimes, mostly a state matter. Senator Moynihan and Prof. Di'lulio provide material for "conditions" leading to "delinquency." Gertner said, “You can actually look at the [neurological] differences," You can also see the differences in young men from one and two parent homes.
[From article]
Describing how to implement these scientific breakthroughs, Judge Gertner emphasized the importance of objective neuroscience in strengthening the argument
[. . .]
Robert T. Kinscherff, a senior visiting fellow [. . .] said there is a need for increased understanding of the very common conditions that lead to youth delinquency. [and] the “growing political agreement” that—rather than being tough on crime—the U.S. Department of Justice should be “smart on crime.”
[. . .]
Gertner said, “You can actually look at the [neurological] differences,
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2015/9/29/panel-law-neuroscience-adolescents/
Scholars Discuss Role of Neuroscience in Youth Criminal Justice
By JONAH S. LEFKOE, CONTRIBUTING WRITER
Harvard Crimson
September 28, 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment