lezione 8 aprile 2013 - pagina di ingresso - eclt ... · anno accademico 2012-13 ... lezione 8...
TRANSCRIPT
Corso
Diritto, scienza, nuove tecnologie
Università degli Studi di Pavia Dipartimento di Giurisprudenza
Anno Accademico 2012-13
Prof. Amedeo Santosuosso
La stampa e l'utilizzo di lucidi e di materiali messi a disposizione sono
consentiti esclusivamente per le finalità del corso.
Ogni altro utilizzo deve essere preventivamente autorizzato.
Lezione
8 aprile 2013
Neuro&Law (a)
Neuroscience Law
Neuroscience Law
A winter school on Neuroscience and Law
Neuroscience & the Law: cognitive neuroscience
• Neuroscience investigates the brain and
nervous system, focusing on structures,
functions, processes within this system and its
interactions with other bodily systems.
• Within this field, cognitive neuroscience (CNS) investigates the relationship between the nervous system and mental processes, looking for links between the brain and the various powers, abilities, and capacities that we associate with the mind and mental life such as decision making, knowledge, memory, and consciousness.
• Many of the issues at the interaction of law and neuroscience concern cognitive neuroscience because the law is typically interested in these mental processes and their roles in human behavior.
Neuroscience Law
Neuroscience Law
Mind – brain • Dualism • Monism • Third position ?
Neuroscience Law
A winter school on Neuroscience and Law
Neuroscience Law
http://www.unipv-lawtech.eu/lang1/winter-school-2013-program.html
“The subject of this Essay is not the so-called Liberty of the Will […] but Civil, or Social Liberty: the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual”.
Mill J.S. (1859), On liberty
“The subject of this Essay is not the so-called Liberty of the Will […] but Civil, or Social Liberty: the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual”.
Mill J.S. (1859), On liberty
Free will ?
Agency (the self as an agent) ?
Actions v. thoughts:
is mind external to law, by definition ?
US Constitution - Amendment 1 Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.
ITALY Constitution - Art. 21. Tutti hanno diritto di manifestare liberamente il proprio pensiero con la parola, lo scritto e ogni altro mezzo di diffusione.
[…]
philosophy
Free will ?
Agency (the self as an agent) ?
Actions v. thoughts:
is mind external to law, by definition ?
US Constitution - Amendment 1 Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.
ITALY Constitution - Art. 21. Tutti hanno diritto di manifestare liberamente il proprio pensiero con la parola, lo scritto e ogni altro mezzo di diffusione.
[…]
philosophy
• Cognitive Neuroscience • Neurotechniques and the boundary of
self (BCI, Robots etc.) • Clinical diagnosis of disorders of
consciousness and neuroimaging techniques (PVS)
• Behavioural genetics
• Caselaw • Neuroscience and criminal law • Neuroscience and civil law • Neuroscience and constitutional law • Multilingualism • Databasing • Human agency
Scientific and legal conceptual models Evolution theory, synthetic biology, evolutionary law
Neuroscience and media Neuroethics
Institutional Design, Game Theory and Behavioural Economics
The human brain has been at the center of medicolegal debates since the late 1960s G.J.Annas, AJLM, vol.33 (2007)
The moment that neuroscience began to transform the American legal system... the early 1990s
Jeffrey Rosen, NYT, March 11, 2007
Some recent criminal cases (1981) highlight the difficulties faced by judges who must determine whether brain images can be admitted...
L.S. Khosbin & S.Khosbin, AJLM, vol.33 (2007)
During the past two decades, neuroscientific studies have begun to meet the challenge of understanding of cognitive function. ...These physiological insights will challenge, in turn, legal systems
B. Garland - P. W Glimcher Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2006, 16:130–134
brain death
Weinstein case
Hinckley case
neuroscientific studies
When the debate about neuroscience and the law began?
...
2004
2006
2006
Vol.33, 2-3, 2007
BRAIN IMAGING AND THE LAW
nella versione del volume attualmente disponibile on-line è stato
espunto il diritto, e si legge: “Neuroethics may be defined as the
study of the moral and ethical questions involved in applying new
brain-related scientific findings, such as genetics, brain imaging,
disease diagnosis and prediction, and how the medical, insurance,
and governmental leaders will face them”
conferenza Neuroethics: Mapping the Field, svoltasi il 13-14 giugno
2002 a San Francisco (Stanford University e University of California)
Neuroetica: “lo studio delle questioni etiche, giuridiche e
sociali che sorgono quando le scoperte scientifiche sul
cervello vengono portate nella pratica medica, nelle
interpretazioni giuridiche e nella politica sanitaria e
sociale.
Etica/bioetica/neuroetica/biodiritto/neurodiritto...
Neuroscience - Ethics - Law
Bioethics
Biolaw
Neuroethics
Neurolaw ?
Roboethics
Robolaw?
Nanoethics
Nanolaw ???????
The free will approach The idea that a more complete understanding of the neural mechanism for voluntary decision-making might undermine the legal notion of accountability. Typical related questions: • Would brain scans influence a court’s decision? • Will brain imaging subvert the current nosography
of mental diseases? • Is free will still alive? • …
The free will approach is neither exhaustive, in theoretical terms, nor able to address some important aspects of the new reality of interaction between neuroscience and law.
23
Converging Technologies and legal assumptions
Biology
Genetics
Biotechnologies
Behavioural genetics
InfoBioGroups
Collective Brain
Neurosciences
Law&Brain
Drugs Pollution ...
Atomic manipulation
Nano devices
Why such a great interest toward neuroscience ?
Genetics – reproduction – human hood - sexuality
Neuroscience – brain/mind – liberty/individuality
Charles Darwin: humans are not so separate from all other living organisms
+ Neuroscience: mind is not something added to human/non human bodies
Neuroscience involve
• The mental representation of ourselves
• The development and adaptation of our ideas about
• what is a human being, a society and the rules
we produce (law)
• The concept of democracy and social order
• The concept of deviance
• … and more.
26
I punti di impatto
Il diritto penale (responsabilità)
Il diritto penale (graduazione pena e tipo di risposta)
Il processo: la prova scientifica e il brain imaging
La capacità civile e il consenso informato
La quantificazione del danno (aspetti psichici)
Altri aspetti
• techniques for the objective investigation of subjective states such as pain, memory, and truth-telling;
• evidentiary issues for admitting neuroscience facts and approaches in court proceedings;
• juvenile offenders;
• addiction;
• mental health;
• emotion;
• the neuroeconomics of decision making and cooperation
Goodenough- Tucker , 2010
• free will
• Responsibility
• moral judgment
• punishment
• PVS and Brain Death • Informed consent • Will and contract • Mental capacity • Brain Machine Interfaces • Rehabilitation • Enhancement (e.g. drugs
as Provigil or Ritalin). • ……
1. Aging Neuroscience 2. Autonomic Neuroscience 3. Behavioral Neuroscience 4. Cellular Neuroscience 5. Computational Neuroscience 6. Decision Neuroscience 7. Enteric Neuroscience 8. Evolutionary Neuroscience 9. Human Neuroscience 10. Integrative Neuroscience 11. Molecular Neuroscience 12. Neural Circuits 13. Neuroanatomy
14. Neuroendocrine Science 15. Neuroenergetics 16. Neuroengineering 17. Neurogenesis 18. Neurogenomics 19. Neuroinformatics 20. Neuromorphic Engineering 21. Neuropharmacology 22. Neuroprosthetics 23. Neurorobotics 24. Synaptic Neuroscience 25. Systems Biology 26. Systems Neuroscience
Frontiers in Neuroscience. The Mission Statement: sectors
Thus the area of impact of neuroscience is wider than usually considered. The neuro-induced redefinition of the biological and mental boundaries of the individual gains the priority,
The problem
Understanding human behavior
What social response to deviant behavior
Neuroscience
Neurotecniques
Brain imaging
Behavioural genetics
behavior
Internal/biological approach
External/social approach
34
Alcuni riferimenti temporali
La scoperta della malattia mentale nel processo da fine Settecento
Il dibattito freniatria-diritto e la sistemazione di fine Ottocento della follia parziale
L’uomo entità biologica soggetta alle stesse leggi del mondo animale (Darwin)
Does all this change the game between psychiatry and
the law?
Does all this change the agreement between psychiatry
and the law as settled in XIX century?
• a new twist of well known old problems ?
• a completely new problem ?
Responsabilità penale - psichiatria
Neuroscience impacts on psychiatry both as medical discipline and
in its relationship with the law and the judiciary.
Neuroscience
Psychiatry
Psychiatry - Law
Old questions come to a new life.
PSYCHIATRY AND LAW THE BACKGROUND
Criminal responsibility
XVIII Century
(Initially) defined by Canon Law
Free will - Secularization of the concept (Kant)
(At the end) Crime Sin
XIX Century
Delirium insanity: psychiatry is accepted in criminal trials.
Insanity without deliurim: the real question!
Psychiatrists v. judges
Judges’ objection to the role of psychiatrists in cases of diminished capacity
Free will and retribution (punishment = crime) v. Social defence
In Italy
1874: Società di Freniatria (Italian Psychiatry Association)
1875: Rivista della Società di Freniatria (Journal of Psychiatrist Association)
At the end of the Century, the Ministry of Justice recognized the
participation of psychiatry to the drafting of Italian Penal Code as necessary.
What was at stake:
- diminished capacity;
- man as a biological entity subject to the same rules as the
animal world (Darwin); Positive School/Scuola Positiva (Cesare
Lombroso et al.)
v.
- Scuola Classica del diritto penale (Francesco Carrara)
The COMMON LAW context
Psychiatrists and judges debate on the necessity mens rea at the moment of the crime Insanity Defense as reason to exclude criminal responsibility
40
Codice Zanardelli (1889)
Inserimento della infermità di mente e della imputabilità grandemente scemata per la follia morale.
Opposizione e critiche di principio e sostanziale accettazione pratica
Codice penale italiano “Rocco”(1930)
Art. 85 - Capacità d'intendere e di volere
Nessuno può essere punito per un fatto preveduto dalla legge come reato, se, al
momento in cui lo ha commesso, non era imputabile.
È imputabile chi ha la capacità di intendere e di volere.
Art. 88 - Vizio totale di mente
Non è imputabile chi, nel momento in cui ha commesso il fatto, era, per infermità, in
tale stato di mente da escludere la capacità di intendere o di volere.
Art. 89 - Vizio parziale di mente
Chi, nel momento in cui ha commesso il fatto, era, per infermità, in tale stato di mente
da scemare grandemente, senza escluderla, la capacità d'intendere o di volere,
risponde del reato commesso; ma la pena è diminuita.
41
Scuola classica a) Libero arbitrio
b) Imputabilità c) Responsabilità morale d) Pena determinata
(funzione del reato)
e) Retribuzione (con valenza etica)
Teoria del reato Imputabilità
Scuola positiva
a) Determinismo (biologico e sociale)
b) Pericolosità sociale
c) Responsabilità legale
d) Temibilità del reo e pena indeterminata (funzione del reo: tipo criminale, tipo d’autore)
e) Difesa sociale
Teoria della pena
Imputazione
Maggior limite: non dà risposte per soggetti non capaci
Maggior limite: non critica i processi di criminalizzazione
42
Opposte esigenze sottese all’istituto dell’imputabilità
a) Istanza neoidealistica tesa a valorizzare, sulla scorta del
razionalismo metafisico, il principio della libertà del
volere
b) Il riconoscimento del determinismo psichico, con la
contestuale affermazione della concezione difensiva della
pena
43
“i legislatori, i magistrati, i giurisperiti ... considerando sempre gli uomini come fatti d’anima solamente e d’un medesimo stampo ... e la pena come unico rimedio al male morale, non giovarono certo alla causa dell’umanità e della giustizia...” “il reo studiato coscienziosamente, scrupolosamente, non nel momento solo del reato, ma in tutta la sua vita antecedente, non nel suo essere morale soltanto, ma nella sua organica complessione, nelle sue imperfezioni fisiche, ne’ morbosi germi ereditari ... quali aspetti nuovi dee presentare all’uomo di mente e di cuore, quali sentimenti nuovi e nuove idee non deve ispirare? ...il nostro giornale si presenta ai giurisperiti, ai magistrati, a’ legislatori, e dice loro: venite con noi, guardate, dimandate, tastate, pesate, misurate, contate ... e poi deciderete ... se vi sono altre vie per assicurare la società, e modi migliori, per correggere il male, del carcere e della forca”.
Rivista sperimentale di freniatria e di Medicina Legale (n.1, 1875), Direttore Carlo Levi “Discorso che potrebbe servire ad uso di programma” (Editoriale)
44
• Art. 88. Vizio totale di mente. Non è imputabile chi, nel momento in cui ha commesso il fatto, era, per infermità, in tale stato
di mente da escludere la capacità d'intendere o di volere. • Art. 89. Vizio parziale di mente. Chi, nel momento in cui ha commesso il fatto, era, per infermità, in tale stato di mente da
scemare grandemente, senza escluderla, la capacità d'intendere o di volere, risponde del reato commesso; ma la pena è diminuita.
Corte di Cassazione, S.U., 25.01.2005-08.03.2005, n. 9163: inclusione dei disturbi della personalità nel concetto di
infermità, ampliando i confini della nozione di imputabilità. Va ricercata la concreta attitudine a compromettere
gravemente la capacità di percepire il disvalore del fatto commesso, nonché a recepire il significato del trattamento punitivo
L’esperto scientifico e l’interpretazione della prova neuroscientifica nel sistema penale italiano
45
L’esperto (neuro)scientifico
Sistemi di Common Law
Difesa
Accusa
Giudice (Judge)
Valutazione dell’ammissibilità della
prova scientifica
In caso di ammissibilità
Expert witness (difesa)
Expert witness (accusa)
Giuria che emetterà il
verdetto (black box) CROSS
EXAMINATION
The COMMON LAW context
UK
- 1843: Daniel M’Naghten case (M’Naghten Test)
insanity which excludes his/her capacity of understanding the nature of his action or its being a crime: the defendant cannot be convicted
USA
• M’Naghten rule and its variants (Durham Test...)
• 1962, the American Law Institute publishes its Model Penal Code
• ALI Test (it links “mental desease of defect” to an individual’s capacity to
appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or conform his conduct to the
requirements of the law)
• 1982: Hinckley case (after his insanity acquittal, 25 States use a strict or
modified M’Naghten rule, 19 states and the Federal Government use a modified
ALI Test; 4 states returned to a traditional mens rea defense by abolishing the
insanity defense).
• Roper v. Simmons (125 S. Ct. 1183 (2005)), the court ruled to prohibit
capital punishment for juvenile offenders under the age of 18. The opinion of the
Supreme Court referred specifically to ‘‘the scientific and sociological studies’’
cited by the respondent and amici as confirming a ‘‘lack of maturity and an
underdeveloped sense of responsibility’’ in the young (several of these amici
specifically employed neurobiological evidence to support their arguments).
The impact
• Jury: indirect/emotional effect (colours, images)
• Expert witness testimony v. Court appointed expert (CTU)
Diminished Responsibility Defense (originally, jurors used to exhort the jugde for a reduction of sentence in case of partial insanity of the guilty) In USA, D.R.D. is now provided by The Federal Sentencing Guidelines The debate is going on :
Stephen Morse (Diminished rationality, diminished responsibility, 2003) proposes that the criminal law should include a new generic, doctrinal mitigating excuse of partial responsibility that would apply to all crimes and would be determined by the trier of the fact: “Guilty but partially responsible (G.P.R.)”
“For the law, neuroscience change nothing and everything. Free will as we ordinarily understand it is an illusion generated by our cognitive architecture. Retributivist notions of criminal responsibility ultimately depend on this illusion and, if we are lucky, they will give way to consequentialist ones, thus radically transforming our approach to criminal justice”.
J. Green, J. Cohen, For the law, neuroscience change nothing and everything, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B, 2004
Two main attitudes
Brains do not commit crimes; people commit crimes. ...a cognitive pathology, “Brain Overclaim Syndrome [BOS],” that often afflicts those inflamed by the fascinating new discoveries in the neurosciences. [...] the signs and symptoms of BOS, the essential feature of which is to make claims about the implications of neuroscience for criminal responsibility that cannot be conceptually or empirically sustained.
S. J. Morse, Brain Overclaim Syndrome and Criminal Responsibility: A Diagnostic Note, Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series (2003)
Beyond retribution ?
What degree of scientific “certainty” do we require in order
to accept neuroscience (and other scientific contributions) in
the Courts ?
Present neuroimaging techniques give researchers the possibility to see
structures of the living brain and discern structural and functional
anomalies
Hypothesis about connections between
physical and mental activities and
applications on criminal law:
Criminal
responsibility Criminal
rehabilitation
Social defence
After judgment and sentencing: what to do with guilty people?
Does neuroscience (or any other science) offer any chance of treatment ?
Is treatment of antisocial behaviour desirable ?
Is it socially and ethically acceptable ?
Is there any difference between social, psychological, surgical, pharmacological intervention on people?
Is informed consent necessary ?
Is it a sufficient protection ?
A “new” problem