June 30, 2015 Can brain imaging be a “pain-o-meter” that tells courts when a person is in pain? Can fMRI help us discern whether intractable chronic pain is “all in your head” or all in the brain – or will it require us to reconsider that distinction? Leading neuroscientists, legal scholars, and bioethicists debated standards and limits on how the law can use brain science to get smarter about a subject that touches everyone.
– Irene Tracey, DPhil, Nuffield Professor of Anaesthetic Science; Professor of Clinical Neurology; Director, Oxford Centre for Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain, Oxford University
– Henry T. Greely, JD, Edelman Johnson Professor of Law and Director, Center for Law and the Biosciences, Stanford Law School; Professor (by courtesy) of Genetics, Stanford School of Medicine; Chair, Steering Committee of the Center for Biomedical Ethics; Director, Stanford Program in Neuroscience and Society
This event was part of the Project on Law and Applied Neuroscience, a collaboration between the Center for Law, Brain & Behavior at Massachusetts General Hospital and the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School. Cosponsored by the Center for Bioethics at Harvard Medical School and the Mind Brain Behavior Interfaculty Initiative at Harvard University, and with support from the Oswald DeN. Cammann Fund.
Visit our website for more information: http://petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/events/details/visible-solutions.