The Addicted Defendant: Liability and Blame

吸毒成瘾的被告：责任和指责

• 批准号: 2890151
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: University of Cambridge
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2023
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2023 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2890151
• 关键词: Addicted; Defendant; Liability; Blame

A work to show how criminal law engages with substance addiction, expose the contradictory approach, highlighting the subsequent risks and proposing avenues for reform. The law presently contradicts itself. Intoxication rules suggest thatmere intoxication and addicted intoxication are synonymous. Commentary in Law Commission reports indicate that addiction can never lead to involuntary intoxication. Yet certain capacity related offences suggest that addiction canresult in compulsive ingestion of an intoxicant. These contrasting accounts come with different implicit philosophical groundings which speak to the nature of addiction. Moreover, the contradictions mean there is a serious risk ofdefendants becoming unfairly incarcerated or defendants unfairly walking free, as both conclusions cannot be medically nor philosophically sound. This interdisciplinary, desk-based research seeks to show the neuroscience of addiction,followed by the philosophical interpretations which have met it. It is original in translating the medical and philosophical debates into the context of criminal law. Much has been written on addiction, but there has been no application of thesedebates to the present regulations. This is a matter of significance as the present contradictory framework raises serious questions about an equitable application of the state's strongest sanction.

这部作品展示了刑法如何处理药物成瘾问题，揭露矛盾的方法，强调随后的风险并提出改革途径。目前该法律自相矛盾。中毒规则表明，单纯中毒和成瘾中毒是同义词。法律委员会报告中的评论表明，成瘾永远不会导致非自愿中毒。然而，某些与能力相关的犯罪表明，成瘾可能导致强迫性摄入麻醉品。这些截然不同的说法具有不同的隐含哲学基础，说明了成瘾的本质。此外，这些矛盾意味着存在被告被不公平监禁或被告不公平地自由行走的严重风险，因为这两种结论在医学上或哲学上都不合理。这项跨学科的案头研究旨在展示成瘾的神经科学，以及与之相适应的哲学解释。它将医学和哲学辩论转化为刑法的背景是原创的。关于成瘾的文章已经有很多，但这些争论尚未应用于现行法规。这是一个重要的问题，因为目前的矛盾框架引发了关于公平适用国家最严厉制裁的严重问题。