Date of this Version
A recent body of work in neuroscience examines the brains of people suffering from social and economic disadvantage. This article assesses claims that this research can help generate more effective strategies for addressing these social conditions and their effects. It concludes that the so-called neuroscience of deprivation has no unique practical payoff, and that scientists, journalists, and policy-makers should stop claiming otherwise. Because this research does not, and generally cannot, distinguish between innate versus environmental causes of brain characteristics , it cannot predict whether neurological and behavioral deficits can be addressed by reducing social deprivation. Also, knowledge of brain mechanisms yields no special insights, over and above behavioral science and social observation, into how to alleviate har ms attributed to deprivation. That project depends on changing real-world circumstances and behaviors, which is limited by ethical, practical, and political constraints.
©2017 by the American Bar Association. Reprinted with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any or portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association.
Wax, A. L. (2017). The Poverty of the Neuroscience of Poverty: Policy Payoff or False Promise?. Jurimetrics, 57 239-287. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/neuroethics_pubs/151
Date Posted: 04 January 2018
This document has been peer reviewed.