Neurolaw is a specific field brought about by jurisprudence dedicated to brain injury and spinal cord injury cases. This concept is a combination of medical, rehabilitation and law. This was devised for giving particular attention to the special needs that accompany brain injury and spinal cord injury.
The introduction of Neurolaw in our current legal system has brought tremendous controversy. Diverse opinions from known legal professionals have come out, attacking or defending the introduction of the unfamiliar world of neuroscience in the legal sphere. To note, this move made a radical change to the legal system and standards.
An article in the New York Times entitled “The Brain on the Stand” relates that there are perplexing questions that involved with the entry of this law in the legal realms. As to this date, the law has gray features. By then, the author suggested, “We must instead look to our own powers of reasoning and intuition, relatively primitive as they may be”.
Setting aside the various views of the Neurolaw, I am of the opinion that we should let the innovation stay and mixed with our current system. This is a good development to our system of laws.
The idea that it is all too broad, too sweeping, all encompassing was all but premature notions with no verifiable vestige of truth. It was all speculative and imaginary.
Neurolaw was introduced for a definite purpose. It caters the delicate subject of the spinal cord injury and brain injury victims in relation to their claims and rehabilitation. This law must be given a place for its observance and a chance to proliferate.
