Search Results (5)

Famed lawyer Clarence Darrow (1857–1938) argued strongly for an early-life public health approach to crime prevention, one that focused on education, poverty reduction, and equity of resources. Due to his defense of marginalized persons and his positions that were often at odds with his legal colleagues and public opinion, he was known as the Big Minority Man. He argued that the assumption of free will—humans as free moral agents—justifies systems of inequity, retributive punishment, and “unadulterated brutality.” Here, the authors revisit Darrow’s views and expand upon them via contemporary research. We examine increasingly louder argumentation—from scholars across multiple disciplines—contending that prescientific notions of willpower, free will, blameworthiness, and moral responsibility, are contributing to social harms. We draw from biopsychosocial perspectives and recent scientific consensus papers calling for the dismantling of folk psychology ideas of willpower and blameworthiness in obesity. We scrutinize how the status quo of the legal system is justified and argue that outdated notions of ‘moral fiber’ need to be addressed at the root. The authors examine recent arguments for one of Darrow’s ideas—a public health quarantine model of public safety and carceral care that considers the ‘causes of the causes’ and risk assessments through a public health lens. In our view, public health needs to vigorously scrutinize the prescientific “normative” underpinnings of the criminal justice system. Full article

The search for biological markers that can be reliably linked to aggression and antisocial behavior has been central to the work of biological criminology. One such marker, uric acid, has long been suspected to play a causative role in promoting anger, irritability, aggression, and violence. Here, in this perspective article, we revisit some of the historical interest in uric acid as a compound relevant to brain and behavior, and reflect these early accounts off emergent scientific research. Advances in brain sciences, including neuropsychiatry and neuromicrobiology, have allowed for a more sophisticated understanding of potential mechanistic pathways linking uric acid with cognition and behavior. The updated science suggests that some of the early ideas surrounding uric acid and criminology had credibility. The available research strongly suggests that uric acid, as a potential biomarker of risk, is worthy of further research and close scrutiny. Informed by emergent gut–brain–microbiome research, we argue that certain aspects of early-to-mid-20th-century biological criminology were prematurely abandoned. From a legalome perspective, further advances surrounding uric acid and other gut–brain biomarkers can aid in shaping more humane, scientifically grounded policies that recognize the interplay between biology and environment. Full article

Over the last decade there has been increasing interest in the links between the consumption of ultra-processed foods and various neuropsychiatric disorders, aggression, and antisocial behavior. Neurolaw is an interdisciplinary field that seeks to translate the rapid and voluminous advances in brain science into legal decisions and policy. An enhanced understanding of biophysiological mechanisms by which ultra-processed foods influence brain and behavior allows for a historical reexamination of one of forensic neuropsychiatry’s most famous cases—The People v. White and its associated ‘Twinkie Defense’. Here in this Viewpoint article, we pair original court transcripts with emergent research in neurolaw, including nutritional neuroscience, microbiome sciences (legalome), pre-clinical mechanistic research, and clinical intervention trials. Advances in neuroscience, and related fields such as the microbiome, are challenging basic assumptions in the criminal justice system, including notions of universal free will. Recent dismissals of criminal charges related to auto-brewery syndrome demonstrate that courts are open to advances at the intersection of neuromicrobiology and nutritional neuroscience, including those that relate to criminal intent and diminished capacity. As such, it is our contention that experts in the neurosciences will play an increasing role in shaping research that underpins 21st-century courtroom discourse, policy, and decision-making. Full article

International studies have linked the consumption of ultra-processed foods with a variety of non-communicable diseases. Included in this growing body of research is evidence linking ultra-processed foods to mental disorders, aggression, and antisocial behavior. Although the idea that dietary patterns and various nutrients or additives can influence brain and behavior has a long history in criminology, in the absence of plausible mechanisms and convincing intervention trials, the topic was mostly excluded from mainstream discourse. The emergence of research across nutritional neuroscience and nutritional psychology/psychiatry, combined with mechanistic bench science, and human intervention trials, has provided support to epidemiological findings, and legitimacy to the concept of nutritional criminology. Among the emergent research, microbiome sciences have illuminated mechanistic pathways linking various socioeconomic and environmental factors, including the consumption of ultra-processed foods, with aggression and antisocial behavior. Here in this review, we examine this burgeoning research, including that related to ultra-processed food addiction, and explore its relevance across the criminal justice spectrum—from prevention to intervention—and in courtroom considerations of diminished capacity. We use auto-brewery syndrome as an example of intersecting diet and gut microbiome science that has been used to refute mens rea in criminal charges. The legalome—microbiome and omics science applied in forensic and legal psychology—appears set to emerge as an important consideration in matters of criminology, law, and justice. Full article

Recent studies have illuminated the potential harms associated with ultra-processed foods, including poor mental health, aggression, and antisocial behavior. At the same time, the human gut microbiome has emerged as an important contributor to cognition and behavior, disrupting concepts of the biopsychosocial ‘self’ and raising questions related to free will. Since the microbiome is undeniably connected to dietary patterns and components, the topics of nutrition and microbes are of heightened interest to neuroscience and psychiatry. Research spanning epidemiology, mechanistic bench science, and human intervention trials has brought legitimacy to nutritional criminology and the idea that nutrition is of relevance to the criminal justice system. The individual and community-level relationships between nutrition and behavior are also salient to torts and the relatively new field of food crime—that which examines the vast harms, including grand-scale non-communicable diseases and behavioral outcomes, caused by the manufacturers, distributors, and marketers of ultra-processed food products. Here in this essay, we will synthesize various strands of research, reflecting this emergent science, using a notable case that straddled both neurolaw and food crime, Huberty v. McDonald’s (1987). It is our contention that the legalome—microbiome and omics science applied in neurolaw and forensics—will play an increasing role in 21st-century courtroom discourse, policy, and decision-making. Full article