We’re all aware of the tragedy at V Tech. The authorities seem to know who was responsible. Presuming the situation of the perpetrator is as reported, the person had a very deranged mind.
Currently, there is a lot of research being done in the field of neuroscience. Potentially, it could be the next frontier in the advancement of science. Brains are being mapped and much is being done to try to understand how the brain functions.
Obviously, the brain of the perpetrator could prove to be a very valuable object for research now and in the future. Hypothetically, if the family wanted the brain destroyed is there any law or authority that could prevent that from happening? What are the legal issues and what could the courts do? Is there a distinction between this case where there was never any legal conviction and the case of a mass murderer who had been caught and convicted?
There are plenty of deviants with brains to study already. Most research of this type is more basic than you might think. It is mainly animal (rat) based and live animal brain recordings are more valuable than dead animals. The problem is that we still don’t know enough about how the brain works to design a good experiment around someone like that. You would generally need similar people to be in the same group with him as well as controls. Post Hoc human brain tissue analysis isn’t that great for behavioral neuroscience although it can be for other types of pathological neuroscience and neurology.
Chances are that the gunman wouldn’t show any gross morphological brain abnormalities (although not impossible). Once we get past large brain and behavior deviances, things become murky very fast and it generally wouldn’t make a good experiment because it would be a needle in a haystack (and we don’t understand the haystack).
That’s sort of my point. While the brain may not be all that valuable for experimentation today that doesn’t mean that it won’t be in the future especially with the advancements and current emphasis on neuroscience. That is why there might be some value in preserving it (cryogentics, maybe). That’s why I’m wondering if there is any legal basis in a situation like this to insist that the brain is preserved even if it is against the wishes of the family (and I’m not suggesting or saying that they are doing that). Again, hypothetical.
Dead brains aren’t that valuable when studying mental illness. The differences we can observe in the workings of a live abby normal brain are very educational. OTTOMH, we learned some surprising things about schizophrenia once we could perform CAT, MRI, etc scans on live subjects.
Additionally, it’s not like there’s a shortage or a danger of a shortage of homicidal brains. Our prisons have plenty of people who are perfectly willing to go on shooting sprees. If there’s an advance in neuroscience and we need a mass murderer’s brain, there’ll be an available mass murderer.