Under the Cloak of Brain Science: Risk Assessments, Parole, and the Powerful Guise of Objectivity

IF 2.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW California Law Review Pub Date : 2017-01-01 DOI:10.15779/Z38NS0KX20
Jeremy Isard
{"title":"Under the Cloak of Brain Science: Risk Assessments, Parole, and the Powerful Guise of Objectivity","authors":"Jeremy Isard","doi":"10.15779/Z38NS0KX20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Note examines the adoption of two psychological risk assessment protocols used on “lifers” by the California Board of Parole Hearings in preparation for parole suitability hearings. Probation and parole agencies employ risk assessment protocols across state and federal jurisdictions to measure the likelihood that an individual will pose a danger to society if released from prison. By examining the adoption and recent reformulation of risk assessment protocols in California, this Note considers some of the myriad demands that courts and administrative agencies place on brain science. Applying the California parole process as a parable of such pressures, this Note argues that brain science has a unique capacity to supersede legal inquiry itself, and thus should only be used in legal and administrative settings with extreme caution.","PeriodicalId":51452,"journal":{"name":"California Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"California Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38NS0KX20","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

This Note examines the adoption of two psychological risk assessment protocols used on “lifers” by the California Board of Parole Hearings in preparation for parole suitability hearings. Probation and parole agencies employ risk assessment protocols across state and federal jurisdictions to measure the likelihood that an individual will pose a danger to society if released from prison. By examining the adoption and recent reformulation of risk assessment protocols in California, this Note considers some of the myriad demands that courts and administrative agencies place on brain science. Applying the California parole process as a parable of such pressures, this Note argues that brain science has a unique capacity to supersede legal inquiry itself, and thus should only be used in legal and administrative settings with extreme caution.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在脑科学的外衣下:风险评估、假释和客观性的强大伪装
本说明审查了加州假释听证委员会在准备假释适宜性听证时对“无期徒刑犯”采用的两种心理风险评估方案。缓刑和假释机构在州和联邦司法管辖区采用风险评估协议来衡量一个人从监狱释放后对社会构成危险的可能性。通过审查加州风险评估协议的采用和最近的重新制定,本文考虑了法院和行政机构对脑科学提出的无数要求中的一些。本文将加州假释程序作为此类压力的一个寓言,认为脑科学具有取代法律调查本身的独特能力,因此只应在法律和行政环境中极为谨慎地使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: This review essay considers the state of hybrid democracy in California through an examination of three worthy books: Daniel Weintraub, Party of One: Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Rise of the Independent Voter; Center for Governmental Studies, Democracy by Initiative: Shaping California"s Fourth Branch of Government (Second Edition), and Mark Baldassare and Cheryl Katz, The Coming of Age of Direct Democracy: California"s Recall and Beyond. The essay concludes that despite the hoopla about Governor Schwarzenegger as a "party of one" and a new age of "hybrid democracy" in California.
期刊最新文献
Democracy's Destiny Visible Policing: Technology, Transparency, and Democratic Control An Unstable Core: Self-Defense and the Second Amendment Paper Terrorists: Independence Movements and the Terrorism Bar Pump the Brakes: What Financial Regulators Should Consider in Trying to Prevent a Subprime Auto Loan Bubble
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1