Punishment and Rehabilitation in the Use of Neurointerventions for Criminals

摘要

Birks and Buyx (2018) argue that punishment of criminal offenders using mandatory neurointerventions constitutes a morally objectionable intervention in the mental state of an offender. Birks and Buyx note that there are different theories underlying punishment but state that their discussion of neurointerventions as punishment is separate and distinct from considerations of whether a neurointervention fulfills a rehabilitative goal. Rehabilitation is one of the theories for punishment within the criminal justice system, along with retribution, deterrence and incapacitation (Phelps 2011). Mandatory neurointervention is a particularly troubling question for those who might otherwise advocate for applying advances in neuroscience to improving treatment and rehabilitation of offenders. Birks and Buyx examine whether mandatory neurointervention results in greater harm than incarceration. Yet the underlying goals of punishment bear upon an evaluation of the relative harms of different forms of punishment.