Neurolaw in Japan

Chapter

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.

References

  1. Akiba E (2010) Psychiatric medicine (in Japanese). In: Kai K (ed) Lecture: bioethics and law (in Japanese). Horitsubunnkasha, Kyoto, p 242Google Scholar
  2. Awaya T (2004) Does mankind begin to have his own wing? In: Nishinihon Seimeirinri Kenkyuukai (West Japan Bioethics Study Group) (ed) Toward remaking bioethics: perspectives and subjects (in Japanese). Seikyuusha, Tokyo, p 180Google Scholar
  3. Bai K (1974) Science, law and life (in Japanese). In: Matsuo T (ed) Life science note (in Japanese). Tokyo University Press, Tokyo, p 197ffGoogle Scholar
  4. Fukushi T, Sakura O, Koizumi H (2007) Ethical considerations of neuroscience research: the perspectives on neuroethics in Japan. Neurosci Res 57:10–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Greely HT (2006) The social effects of advances in neuroscience: legal problems, legal perspectives (by translation in Japanese). In: Illes (ed) Neuroethics-defining the issues in theory, practice and policy. Oxford University Press, New York, p 399ffGoogle Scholar
  6. Hilenkamp T (ed) (2006) Neue Hirnforschung-Neues Strafrecht? (in Germany). Nomos, Baden-BadenGoogle Scholar
  7. Ida R (2009) Bioethics and law in the post-genome society (in Japanese). In: Kai K (ed) Post-genome society and medical law (in Japanese), A series of medical law, vol 1. Shinzansha, Tokyo, p 211ffGoogle Scholar
  8. Illes J (ed) (2006) Neuroethics-defining the issues in theory, practice and policy. Oxford University Press, New York (Translation into Japanese by Takahashi T, Kume K (ed), 2008), Shinohara-Shuppannshinsha, Tokyo)Google Scholar
  9. Kagawa C (2006) Newness of neuroethics (in Japanese). Gendaishiso (Modernthought) 34(11):188ffGoogle Scholar
  10. Kagawa C (2008) Critisism to Balkanierung Bioethics and Neuroethics (in Japanese). Gendaishiso (Modernthought) 36(7):69ffGoogle Scholar
  11. Kai K (2005) Protection of human subjects and criminal law (in Japanese). Seibundo, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  12. Kai K (2006) Importance of bio-ethics in brain-science research (in Japanese). J Jpn Assoc Bioethics. 16(1):12ffGoogle Scholar
  13. Kai K (ed) (2007) Genetic information and legal policy (in Japanese). Seibundo, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  14. Kai K (2009) Model of regulation on medical innovation/medical research from the perspective of comparative law (in Japanese). In: Kai (ed) Post-genome society and medical law (in Japanese), A series of medical law, vol 1. Shinzansha, Tokyo, p 191ffGoogle Scholar
  15. Kaufmann A (1976) Das Schuldprinzip-Eine strafrechtlich-rechtsphilosophische Untersuchung, 2. Aufl., Carl Winter Universität, Heidelberg (translation into Japanese by Katsunori Kai, 2000, Kyushu University Press, Fukuoka)Google Scholar
  16. Koizumi H (2006) Importance of bio-ethics in brain-science research (in Japanese). J Jpn Assoc Bioethics 16(1):12ffGoogle Scholar
  17. Masuda Y (2007) Arguments concerning results of brain science and criminal responsibility (sequel) (in Japanese). Horitsuronso 79(6):9ffGoogle Scholar
  18. Matoiba M (2008) Neuroethics as political theory (in japanese). Gendaishiso (Modernthought) 36(7):138Google Scholar
  19. Matsubara Y, Mima T (2008) A talk: creation of neuroethics (in Japanese). Gendaishiso (Modernthought) 36(7):50ffGoogle Scholar
  20. Miller FG, Fins JJ (2006) Protecting human subjects in brain research: a pragmatic perspective (by translation in Japanese). In: Illes (ed) Neuroethics-defining the issues in theory, practice and policy. Oxford University Press, New York, p 210ffGoogle Scholar
  21. Nudeshima J (2008) Can be brainscience “non-invasive”? (in Japanese). Gendaishiso (Modernthought) 36(7):157Google Scholar
  22. Shimada M (2009) Theory of free will and neuroscience (in Japanese). Report of graduate school of law in Chuo University, No. 38, p 225ffGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Professional Legal Education and Research (CPLER), Waseda Law SchoolTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations