Acting on impulse: using the neuroscience of impulse control to improve the law

This thesis investigates the potential legal utility of neurotechnologies which measure correlates of impulsive behaviors. Chapter 1 explains my philosophical position and how this position compares to others in the field. Chapter 2 explores some of the technical concepts which must be understood for the discussion of neurotechnologies and their applications to be fruitful. These chapters will be important for both explaining the capabilities of a neuroscientific approach to neural abnormalities as well as how they relate to the kind of regulation in which the law is engaged. The purpose of Chapter 3 will be a descriptive account of Canadian law where I will begin to explore how to apply ideas and experiments from neuroscience to specific areas of law. Chapter 3 will look at actual examples of Canadian criminal law and will span topics from the creation of law to the construction of appropriate sentences. Chapter 4 will debate if and how we should apply the neuroscientific perspective to the law given the ethical concerns surrounding the applications described in Chapter 3. The thrust of the chapter is that the development of the law does not occur in a vacuum and any alteration either to the laws themselves, how they are interpreted, or the technologies used to provide evidence, must have an ethical justification, that is, a way in which the proposed change will better meet the needs of society and the ethical objectives of the law. Sometimes these justifications can be drawn directly from constitutional documents, such as the Charter, or from the Criminal Code, while at other times these justifications depend upon arguments about furthering meaningful responsibility and therapeutic outcomes.

Public Attitudes and Perceptions toward the NCRMD Defense

In Canada today, a person who performs an illegal act that is deemed to be the result of a mental illness is eligible for the not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (NCRMD) defense. This defense can remove the blame and responsibility from an individual for an act that would otherwise be considered criminal. The present study examines possible factors that may influence people’s opinions on the defense and the treatment of mentally ill offenders in general. A sample of 257 participants (190 women, 38 men, 29 gender unknown) with ages ranging from 18-73 (M = 26.59, SD = 12.59) completed an online survey that assessed attitudes, opinions, and knowledge of mental illness, mentally ill offenders, and the NCRMD defense. Results showed that several factors were related to how positive or negative participants considered the defense to be, including experience with mental illness or the justice system and knowledge of schizophrenia or the sentences associated with the NCRMD defense. Findings suggest education is important in attaining more positive views of mentally ill offenders and the NCRMD defense.