Neurolaw in Japan

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

In Japan, we are now discussing neuroethics [We can know the detailed contents of neuroethics and the various problems by Illes (Neuroethics-defining the issues in theory, practice and policy, 2006). And concerning the situations of neuroethics in Japan, see Fukushi et al. (Neuroscience Research 57:10-16, 2007)], but have not yet argued on neurolaw in earnest. Right from the beginning, neuroethics in itself is a very new field, which has only begun within the last few years in the world [See Chiaki Kagawa (Gendaishiso (Modernthought), 34(11):188ff, 2006), Chiaki Kagawa (Gendaishiso (Modernthought), 36(7):69ff, 2008)]. Also neurolaw is a newer field and concept of law, so we are now discussing on the problem of free will, the criminal responsibility, and the problem of the limit of intervention into human brain in the field of human experimentation or enhancement as much as possible. In the field of Bioethics, however, we have accumulations of arguments on neuroethics in bioethics in Japan. Therefore, in this paper I must start to follow the situations of arguments on neuroethics in Japan, and then advance toward legal issues in the field of neuroscience in Japan, and finally consider the way to legal regulation. The decisive question is whether it is possible to shift from neuroethics to neurolaw in Japan.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationInternational Neurolaw: A Comparative Analysis
PublisherSpringer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
Pages215-225
Number of pages11
ISBN (Print)9783642215414, 3642215408, 9783642215407
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013 Nov 1

Fingerprint

Japan
neurosciences
bioethics
freedom of will
theory-practice
brain
regulation
responsibility
Law

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences(all)

Cite this

Kai, K. (2013). Neurolaw in Japan. In International Neurolaw: A Comparative Analysis (pp. 215-225). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21541-4_12

Neurolaw in Japan. / Kai, Katsunori.

International Neurolaw: A Comparative Analysis. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. p. 215-225.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Kai, K 2013, Neurolaw in Japan. in International Neurolaw: A Comparative Analysis. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 215-225. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21541-4_12
Kai K. Neurolaw in Japan. In International Neurolaw: A Comparative Analysis. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. 2013. p. 215-225 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21541-4_12
Kai, Katsunori. / Neurolaw in Japan. International Neurolaw: A Comparative Analysis. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. pp. 215-225
@inbook{41faa14f29094fbcb0dfa753805106bf,
title = "Neurolaw in Japan",
abstract = "In Japan, we are now discussing neuroethics [We can know the detailed contents of neuroethics and the various problems by Illes (Neuroethics-defining the issues in theory, practice and policy, 2006). And concerning the situations of neuroethics in Japan, see Fukushi et al. (Neuroscience Research 57:10-16, 2007)], but have not yet argued on neurolaw in earnest. Right from the beginning, neuroethics in itself is a very new field, which has only begun within the last few years in the world [See Chiaki Kagawa (Gendaishiso (Modernthought), 34(11):188ff, 2006), Chiaki Kagawa (Gendaishiso (Modernthought), 36(7):69ff, 2008)]. Also neurolaw is a newer field and concept of law, so we are now discussing on the problem of free will, the criminal responsibility, and the problem of the limit of intervention into human brain in the field of human experimentation or enhancement as much as possible. In the field of Bioethics, however, we have accumulations of arguments on neuroethics in bioethics in Japan. Therefore, in this paper I must start to follow the situations of arguments on neuroethics in Japan, and then advance toward legal issues in the field of neuroscience in Japan, and finally consider the way to legal regulation. The decisive question is whether it is possible to shift from neuroethics to neurolaw in Japan.",
author = "Katsunori Kai",
year = "2013",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/978-3-642-21541-4_12",
language = "English",
isbn = "9783642215414",
pages = "215--225",
booktitle = "International Neurolaw: A Comparative Analysis",
publisher = "Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Neurolaw in Japan

AU - Kai, Katsunori

PY - 2013/11/1

Y1 - 2013/11/1

N2 - In Japan, we are now discussing neuroethics [We can know the detailed contents of neuroethics and the various problems by Illes (Neuroethics-defining the issues in theory, practice and policy, 2006). And concerning the situations of neuroethics in Japan, see Fukushi et al. (Neuroscience Research 57:10-16, 2007)], but have not yet argued on neurolaw in earnest. Right from the beginning, neuroethics in itself is a very new field, which has only begun within the last few years in the world [See Chiaki Kagawa (Gendaishiso (Modernthought), 34(11):188ff, 2006), Chiaki Kagawa (Gendaishiso (Modernthought), 36(7):69ff, 2008)]. Also neurolaw is a newer field and concept of law, so we are now discussing on the problem of free will, the criminal responsibility, and the problem of the limit of intervention into human brain in the field of human experimentation or enhancement as much as possible. In the field of Bioethics, however, we have accumulations of arguments on neuroethics in bioethics in Japan. Therefore, in this paper I must start to follow the situations of arguments on neuroethics in Japan, and then advance toward legal issues in the field of neuroscience in Japan, and finally consider the way to legal regulation. The decisive question is whether it is possible to shift from neuroethics to neurolaw in Japan.

AB - In Japan, we are now discussing neuroethics [We can know the detailed contents of neuroethics and the various problems by Illes (Neuroethics-defining the issues in theory, practice and policy, 2006). And concerning the situations of neuroethics in Japan, see Fukushi et al. (Neuroscience Research 57:10-16, 2007)], but have not yet argued on neurolaw in earnest. Right from the beginning, neuroethics in itself is a very new field, which has only begun within the last few years in the world [See Chiaki Kagawa (Gendaishiso (Modernthought), 34(11):188ff, 2006), Chiaki Kagawa (Gendaishiso (Modernthought), 36(7):69ff, 2008)]. Also neurolaw is a newer field and concept of law, so we are now discussing on the problem of free will, the criminal responsibility, and the problem of the limit of intervention into human brain in the field of human experimentation or enhancement as much as possible. In the field of Bioethics, however, we have accumulations of arguments on neuroethics in bioethics in Japan. Therefore, in this paper I must start to follow the situations of arguments on neuroethics in Japan, and then advance toward legal issues in the field of neuroscience in Japan, and finally consider the way to legal regulation. The decisive question is whether it is possible to shift from neuroethics to neurolaw in Japan.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84929587039&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84929587039&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/978-3-642-21541-4_12

DO - 10.1007/978-3-642-21541-4_12

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:84929587039

SN - 9783642215414

SN - 3642215408

SN - 9783642215407

SP - 215

EP - 225

BT - International Neurolaw: A Comparative Analysis

PB - Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

ER -