Morality Stories: Dilemmas in Ethics, Crime & Justice, Third Edition

Moral Dilemmas

---

Enhancement of behavioral traits magnifies the importance of some of these arguments. Although it is assumed by most that the benefits of enhancement will accrue at least to the individuals who receive the enhancements, there is debate about the extent to which society as a whole will benefit However, there are some indications that the complexity of behavior may make it more likely that attempts to enhance a specific characteristic will backfire For example, mice that were engineered to have an increased ability to perform learning tasks also appeared to have a greater sensitivity to pain Similarly, there is concern that increasing memory capacity may have unintended consequences because the ability to filter and delete memories, especially traumatic ones, may have value as a coping mechanism Or, if soldiers receive interventions that make them more aggressive and less fearful in combat, what happens to them and those around them when they are in peacetime situations?

Can these effects be made reliably and completely reversible?

Moral Dilemmas (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Furthermore, do the risks of war or terrorism justify such interventions and conducting research to develop them? The development of new techniques and analytic approaches has clearly changed the study of behavioral genetics and provided tantalizing clues to the role of the genome in a whole host of behaviors and cognitive skills. For example, recent whole-genome scans have identified at least two loci associated with cognitive abilities such as reading ability, word recognition, and IQ as well as with autism and dyslexia Genome-wide association studies have also identified genes associated with depression 20 , schizophrenia 47 , and antisocial behavior 19 , among other behavioral traits.

However, researchers are still struggling to identify definitive genetic causes of behavior. Given the broad policy ramifications of behavioral genetics, it is important that policy makers and the general public understand the limitations of these findings. Findings of genes associated with behaviors ranging from mood disorders to personality traits have been notorious for their unreplicability 48 , , This is also true for nonbehavioral traits such as human height.

For example, three separate studies published in identified 54 variants affecting height in a total sample of more than 63, individuals, but these studies could account for only 2—3. Visscher argued that even studies with sample sizes of 10, individuals were underpowered to detect very small effects of single loci, which might be expected for behavioral traits. The inability of even very large studies to obtain robust and replicable findings has led to thinking about alternative study designs.

A different approach has expressly addressed the complexity of behavioral traits by examining gene-environment interactions A series of studies suggested interactions between the 5HTT gene and life stress influencing depression , the COMT gene and cannabis use influencing adult psychosis , and fatty-acid metabolism genes and breast-feeding influencing IQ Studies of copy-number variation and rare variants have been especially illuminating for the study of behavioral traits such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and autism The social context of biomedical research has changed profoundly over the past few decades, and in ways that are especially relevant to behavioral genetics.

These changes have shaped how and what behavioral genetics research is conducted, how it is funded, and how it will be applied. These broad social shifts also raise ethical, legal, social, and policy questions. One of the major changes to the social context of behavioral genetics is the rise of patient advocacy.

Social movements that had a major impact on biomedical research were perhaps first evident with the formation of advocacy groups for AIDS and breast cancer patients in the s and s 14 , Since then, thousands of disease-focused advocacy groups have formed, and some have had significant influence on biomedical research, including a sharpening of focus on identifying genes related to diseases and developing genetic diagnostic tests Notably, advocacy groups for autism have considerably changed research funding and priorities.

However, advocates have also fundamentally challenged some of the premises of biomedical research, including the categorization of some behavioral conditions as diseases. Who can say what form of wiring will prove best at any given moment? Thus, although patient advocates have fought for increased funding for research on behavioral conditions, they have also raised questions about what this funding should be used for.

One of the other major changes to the context of behavioral genetics is the growth of commercial genetic testing that makes personal genomics available directly to consumers. Dozens of companies have cropped up to provide a variety of services Because such services are essentially unregulated in the United States if they are considered laboratory-developed tests, there are no minimum standards of clinical validity.

The analytic validity of laboratory tests is regulated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments, but genetic targets are not currently included in proficiency testing This investigation included major companies such as 23andMe and Navigenics. Identical samples sent to different companies yielded varied results. For example, a single sample sent to four companies was identified as indicating average, below-average, and above-average risk for prostate cancer and hypertension.

Recently, one company, 23andMe, requested FDA clearance for seven of its tests even though such approval is not required 1. However, other companies have not followed suit, leaving the validity of most commercial testing services in question. Other companies, such as Psynomics http: This commercial stumbling also reflects the lack of clear genetic markers of behavioral traits. However premature genetic tests for complex traits such as behavior may be at this time, there is broad interest in them, at least hypothetically.

However, this interest is guarded and tempered somewhat by concerns about stigmatization, discrimination, and privacy.

Refine your editions:

A focus group study of 36 participants unselected for a personal or family history of psychiatric conditions but of whom 14 reported having such a personal or family history found that approximately two-thirds of the participants were initially interested in genetic testing to predict risk of major depression, but only one-third were still interested after the discussion Participants especially saw benefits of testing for people with a family history of depression.

Some saw the potential for decreased stigma, whereas others were concerned about increased stigma and discrimination based on genetic test results. All participants who commented about direct-to-consumer testing objected to it because of concerns about credibility and privacy of results. Interviews of psychiatric genetic researchers who study mood disorders found that researchers share the concerns of patients, families, and clinicians. Researchers articulated six ethical concerns: Behavioral genetics to date has been used in an evidentiary capacity in the courtroom but has not yet fundamentally affected the key elements that underlie our legal and criminal justice systems.

In the criminal trial process, there are two comprehensive areas in which behavioral genetics evidence could be offered: When determining responsibility, two elements of a crime must be established: This means that there must be evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed a guilty act with guilty intention to establish criminal liability.

Genetic evidence could be used during this phase of the trial to try to negate actus reus , by claiming that the act was not guilty e. Correspondingly, in sentencing, behavioral genetics evidence could be offered in an attempt not to negate responsibility but rather to mitigate it, such as by claiming a genetic predisposition to an impulsive behavior. The goal of this would be to use behavioral genetics evidence to lessen criminal responsibility and therefore lessen the amount or type of punishment given.

The actual use of behavioral genetics evidence in criminal trials has been uncommon. Denno 33 noted that from to , only 81 known cases used behavioral genetics evidence in some capacity. The few cases where defenses have been partially built using behavioral genetics to negate or lessen the mens rea of the defendant through evidence of diminished capacity or lack of intentionality have been unsuccessful.

Instead, defenses have generally focused on using behavioral genetics evidence to try to prove the legal insanity of the defendant rather than diminished capacity or lack of intentionality 8 , Some early instances in which behavioral genetics evidence was offered to support a plea of insanity began in the s, when research and studies of penal populations suggested that males with an extra Y chromosome were prone to violence and more likely to end up in the criminal justice system 58a.

Thus, these cases were never able to establish proof that the defendant suffered a mental disease or disorder that affected his ability to understand or perceive reality or right and wrong. The case State v. Thompson clarified that the XYY insanity defenses had been rejected because the court had drawn a line between evidence that an individual could be predisposed or likely to exhibit certain types of behavior and evidence that a person acted in a certain way because of this predisposition. Other defendants have used genetic evidence to build a defense based on the idea that a genetic predisposition to impulsivity or addiction or a genetic condition superseded their free will to act 44 , In the case United States v.

From this perspective, anyone who could show a predisposition to drug or alcohol abuse could claim to have acted involuntarily in an attempt to evade responsibility for criminal actions. Thus, the court rejected this reasoning. Although Moore and other cases involving impulse control have not yet produced successful defense strategies, opinions in other cases 30 suggest some receptivity, at least by judges, to arguments based on biological predispositions to types of involuntary behavior.

Despite these early attempts to negate criminal responsibility, behavioral genetics evidence is now most often presented during sentencing to mitigate punishment. Although the Georgia Supreme Court rejected this appeal 75 , its use opened the doors for behavioral genetics to be used in a myriad of other sentencing cases. Of the 81 cases since that have employed genetic evidence 33 , most have presented this evidence during sentencing in capital cases 33 , During sentencing, the claim is often that genetic predisposition is a mitigating factor that led the defendants to act as they did, either by causing them to act involuntarily potentially because of a propensity for alcoholism or other substance abuse or by inhibiting them from grasping the intention or consequence of their actions 33 , Therefore, his client had been predisposed to this type of aggressive behavior and a lack of impulse control and had not premeditated the murder he was guilty of committing This unique defense successfully convinced a jury to forgo first- and second-degree murder convictions, including the possibility of the death penalty, and the defendant was convicted on manslaughter charges.

No matter the outlook on the outcome of this case, such examples provide insight into the different types of platforms and settings in which behavioral genetics and genomic science are likely to be influential in the future. Although behavioral genetics has gained some traction and influence, it has not yet substantially changed the legal system, and the number of cases in which behavioral genetics evidence has been presented represents only a small percentage of the total.

Still, as behavioral genetics research continues to progress, many of these questions and potential implications for the legal and criminal justice systems must also be addressed by mainstream academia and policy makers. In fact, criminal cases in the past four years have shown a slow but prominent shift in judicial opinion to favor the allowance of behavioral genetics evidence into court proceedings 33 , showing that these potential policy questions and implications will need answers and analysis much sooner than anticipated.

In addition to its use in court evidence, current and future behavioral genetics research has the potential to permanently affect a host of specific arenas within the legal and criminal justice fields. Although innumerable issues can emerge from this type of research, this article focuses on a perceptions of legal and biological free will and responsibility; b issues arising from the concept of genetic essentialism, such as public, jury, and judicial understandings of genetic evidence as well as potential biological interventions or medications to alter behavior; c redefinition of the concepts of risk, prediction, and dangerousness; and d possible effects on privacy and discrimination.

Recent advances in neuroscience and other biological fields involved in researching the origins of human behavior have added new dimensions to age-old debates 46 , 78 , However, they do not determine how free will should or will be defined in the legal process. The criminal justice system, based on sets of standards, laws, and principles, relies on actors to choose to either violate or not violate those standards, lest they be assigned fault and subsequently punished. The very idea of legal free will is based on the choice to disobey these principles, knowing the repercussions of these actions There are certain mental or psychotic disorders, such as schizophrenia, that cause an actor to lose reason and the ability to make the choice to violate these principles or to understand the repercussions of his or her actions; this is the reason that the insanity defense exists.

In addition, looking at individual cases and circumstances involving human behavior—especially when it comes to subjectively evaluating individual instances of genetic predisposition and how that propensity contributed to the criminal act at hand—would make it impossible to successfully use universal legal principles such as proving proximate or actual cause, establishing the burden of proof, and establishing the elements of the crime across the system when dealing with responsibility or punishment.

The concept of genetic essentialism, emerging from the notions of free will and responsibility, will also surely be affected by current and future behavioral genetics research. Genetic essentialism is an exceedingly difficult concept because it paints a nebulous portrait of what defines a person as that person and how much of that identity and the corresponding actions stemming from that identity are determined by genetic or biological influence. Two major issues arise from this idea. The first is the public, jury, and judicial understandings, or misunderstandings, of genetic evidence as it applies to the self, identity, and behavior.

Academic Tools

There is concern that in court, jury members and judges do not possess the types of knowledge or expertise to make legal decisions based on genetic claims or to recognize the scientific validity of an argument 36a. This was recently seen in a hypothetical case study showing that, on average, surveyed judges gave a lighter, mitigated prison sentence to a criminal when evidence was presented that he was biologically predisposed to psychopathy 9.

It is incredibly challenging to decide whether it would be ethical to therapeutically treat or medicate a genetic or other biological disorder or predisposition of a person if that would prevent him or her from exhibiting certain criminal behaviors. This issue also highlights the relevance and potential uses of two established powers of the state: In regard to potential interventions, these questions would be impossibly difficult to address.

Advances in behavioral genetics also create the potential to redefine the concepts of prediction, risk, and future dangerousness in our criminal justice system. Most of the time, these predictions are made using clinical assessment scales as well as testimony from forensic psychiatrists or clinicians.

In general, the use of predictions of future dangerousness has been highly controversial. Many scholars argue that these clinical risk assessments are not accurate in evaluating risk and that using personal clinician opinion based on these methods to sentence or commit someone is far too subjective and incomplete to make such important judgments, especially decisions that could detain an individual for an indeterminate amount of time Finally, issues surrounding privacy and discrimination are affected by behavioral genetics research.

Questions concerning criminal DNA databases have recently surfaced, such as the extent to which DNA from criminals or those arrested but not convicted of crimes should be retained in state and federal databases, and if so, whether that DNA should be used to study specific traits or markers in behavioral science research without the consent of those individuals There is concern that DNA will be used to discriminate against or label certain populations that are disproportionately represented in these databases Regarding discrimination, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act GINA , which prohibits employers from genetically discriminating against employees regarding health insurance and employment, is an important piece of federal law that protects individuals from being discriminated against based on their genetic propensity for certain disorders.

Professional Ethics in Criminal Justice: Being Ethical When No One is Looking, 3rd Edition

However, GINA does not cover or regulate the newest mode and future of genetic testing: Thus, as stated above, the number of ways that behavioral genetics research can influence the legal and criminal justice systems is ever growing. As technologies and our understanding of behavioral genetics develop, research continues to raise ethical, legal, social, and policy issues, especially as the scope of potential genetic testing expands to the legal and criminal justice systems and to unregulated at-home testing.

Furthermore, there are many other areas in which issues will surely arise in the future. First, the field of behavioral neurogenetics is constantly expanding in its scope of study, and the convergence of neuroscience and behavioral genetics research, paired with new technologies and cutting-edge research techniques in neurogenetics, has the potential to affect the concepts and understandings of free will and morality. Second, it is also likely that military use of behavioral genetics research will increase in the study of areas like posttraumatic stress disorder, the genetic likelihood of suicidal behavior, soldier adaptation, mental resilience and decision making, and improvement and prediction of soldier performance, all of which could produce unique moral challenges because of the lack of autonomy of military personnel.

Manipulation of behavior through genes poses even more difficult ethical challenges. Finally, as technologies allow for prenatal genetic testing and prices continue to fall for whole-genome sequencing, an inordinate amount of prenatal genetic data will be generated that could be misused or misunderstood by clinicians, parents, or the children themselves and could permanently alter the raising, or even the existence, of those children The authors are not aware of any affiliations, memberships, funding, or financial holdings that might be perceived as affecting the objectivity of this review.

National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. Author manuscript; available in PMC Mar Berryessa 1 and Mildred K. Author information Copyright and License information Disclaimer. See other articles in PMC that cite the published article. Abstract The field of behavioral genetics has engendered a host of moral and social concerns virtually since its inception. Genomics of Nonmedical Conditions Much of the science behind the eugenics movement has been discredited 63 , and in retrospect, the research questions posed in that era appear quaint at best, if not plain ludicrous.

Human Evolution New studies related to the genetics of cognitive abilities continue to raise controversy. Noninvasive Prenatal Testing Other genetic technologies have also raised ethical concerns regarding their application to behavior. Optogenetics Another new technology, optogenetics, has revived concerns about the manipulation of the human brain. The Rise of Patient Advocacy One of the major changes to the social context of behavioral genetics is the rise of patient advocacy. The Commercialization of Genetic Testing One of the other major changes to the context of behavioral genetics is the growth of commercial genetic testing that makes personal genomics available directly to consumers.

Perceptions of Genetic Tests for Behavior However premature genetic tests for complex traits such as behavior may be at this time, there is broad interest in them, at least hypothetically. Uses of Behavioral Genetics Evidence in Criminal Trials In the criminal trial process, there are two comprehensive areas in which behavioral genetics evidence could be offered: Future Implications for Law and Criminal Justice In addition to its use in court evidence, current and future behavioral genetics research has the potential to permanently affect a host of specific arenas within the legal and criminal justice fields.

The development of new techniques and analytic approaches, including genome-wide association studies and examination of gene-environment interactions, has clearly changed the study of behavioral genetics. The potential new and future uses of behavioral genetics research continue to raise important ethical, legal, social, and policy issues.

The universality of genetic and genomic tools has allowed researchers to address an ever-widening scope of phenotypes, including personality traits, voting behavior, and moral judgment. Researchers have yet to identify definitive genetic causes of behavior, but the commercialization of genetic testing has created a venue for making such tests available for characteristics such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and intelligence.

Other technologies, such as cell-free fetal DNA analysis for prenatal testing and genetic manipulation through optogenetics, raise ethical and social issues about the appropriate application of technologies, especially regarding behaviors. Behavioral genetics research is now starting to be used in criminal trial procedures, including as a strategy to mitigate punishment, which has been successful in a few cases. Behavioral genetics could also be used in many other facets of the criminal justice system, including prediction of future dangerousness and determining prophylactic intervention to prevent future dangerous acts.

Eugenics comes to America. Jacoby R, Glauberman N, editors. The Bell Curve Debate. Times Books; New York: The social and economic origins of genetic determinism: Genome-wide association study of personality traits in bipolar patients.

Optogenetics, sex, and violence in the brain: Travels in a Neurodiverse World. Behavioral genetics and the punishment of crime. Genetic predictions of future dangerousness: Is there a blueprint for violence? Genetic and environmental influences on human psychological differences. The history of breast cancer advocacy. Institutions, beliefs and ethics: The Ethics of Biomedical Enhancement.

Account Options

Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children. The current state of play on the molecular genetics of depression. Combating Autism Act of Pub. Conrad P, Markens S. A brave new crime-free world? Advances in prenatal screening: Budge US Court of Appeals. Revisiting the legal link between genetics and crime.

Behavioral genetics evidence in criminal cases: The specter of difference. Prenatal whole genome sequencing: Just because we can, should we? Dreyfuss RC, Nelkin D. The jurisprudence of genetics. An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome. What creates our behavioral phenome? Ethical considerations and risks in psychiatric genetics: Interest, rationale, and potential clinical applications of genetic testing for mood disorders: Pearson offers special pricing when you package your text with other student resources.

If you're interested in creating a cost-saving package for your students, contact your Pearson rep. Albanese received his Ph. He was the first Ph. Albanese is author or editor of 18 books that include Organized Crime: From the Mob to Transnational Organized Crime 7th ed. We don't recognize your username or password. The work is protected by local and international copyright laws and is provided solely for the use of instructors in teaching their courses and assessing student learning. You have successfully signed out and will be required to sign back in should you need to download more resources.

Professional Ethics in Criminal Justice: Albanese, Virginia Commonwealth University. Description For courses in Ethics in Criminal Justice. For courses in Ethics in Criminal Justice. Presents the three major ethical schools of thought, virtue, formalism, and utilitarianism, in a clear and cogent way so students can apply them and understand their strengths and limitations in decision-making.

Captures the philosophical underpinnings of modern ethics without overwhelming readers. Shows how ethics impacts individual decisions and how practice can help create an ethical person who can be counted on to make moral choices in the most difficult situations. Uses popular movies and books to raise ethical questions and help students develop ethical reasoning skills.

New to This Edition. Reporting on situations from real-life, helping the student apply ethical principles to actual cases and asking them relevant questions. This feature finds students where they are, by using popular movies as a vehicle for learning ethical reasoning. All movies are summarized in case some students did not see them! Nearly every major issue, problem, scandal, and crime in the criminal justice field has ethics at its core. Table of Contents 1. Ethics and Critical Thinking 2. Seeking the Good 3.

• Allure Book 2 State Of Romance (Contemporary Romance)
• The Commanders of Gettysburg: The Lives and Careers of Robert E. Lee and George G. Meade
• Die Große Koalition: Regierung - Politik - Parteien 2005-2009 (German Edition)
• Frenchie Training Secrets
• Untersuchung zur Haltungs- und Gleichgewichtsregulation bei Patienten mit Cochlea Implantat (German Edition)
• Legal Heirs (Surrendering Charlotte Chronicles - Legal Heirs Book 1)
• Dream. Cronache dellincubo (eNewton Narrativa) (Italian Edition)