Forensic Neurology: Practice Considerations and Training Opportunities

Abstract

Neurologic evidence, including MRI, PET, and EEG, has been introduced in more than 2,800 criminal cases in the past decade, including 12% of all murder trials and 25% of death penalty trials, to argue whether neurologic diseases are present, contribute to criminal behavior, and ultimately whether the defendant is less criminally responsible, competent to stand trial, or should receive a reduced punishment for his or her crime. Unfortunately, neurologists are often not involved in these criminal cases despite being the medical specialty with the most relevant training and expertise to address these issues for the court. Reasons for the absence of neurologists in criminal cases include a lack of awareness from lawyers, judges, and other expert witnesses on the value of including neurologists in forensic evaluations, and the lack of experience, training, and willingness of neurologists to work as expert witnesses in criminal cases. Here, we discuss forensic neurology, a field bridging the gap between neurology, neuroscience, and the law. We discuss the process of performing forensic evaluations, including answering 3 fundamental questions: the neurologic diagnostic question, the behavioral neurology/neuropsychiatry question, and the forensic neurology question. We discuss practical aspects of performing forensic expert witness work and important ethical differences between the neurologist's role in treatment vs forensic settings. Finally, we discuss the currently available pathways for interested neurologists to receive additional training in forensic assessments.