The psycho gene.

the notion that genes play an important role in many diseases has been widely accepted, but many find it much harder to acknowledge a similar link with particular behaviour or even predisposition to crime. partly for this reason, the study of behavioural genetics remains a controversial topic, with disagreement not just over the science itself, but even more so about the therapeutic, societal and legal implications. too much might have been made too soon of early findings that made correlations between alleles of certain genes and tendencies to antisocial or criminal behaviour. indeed, most researchers in the field were appalled by the decision of an italian appeal court in 2009 to cut the sentence of a convicted murderer by one year on the grounds that he had a version of the MAOA gene, which has been linked to aggression and violence (Feresin, 2009). there is equal dismay over some uS courts that went the other way and accepted genetic factors as evidence for the prosecution, leading to higher sentences on the basis that people with particular alleles cannot be cured and will remain a risk to society for longer. “taking genetic factors into account when sentencing is plain stupid, unless we are talking about something like Down’s syndrome or some other syndrome that drastically reduces intelligence and executive functioning,” insisted anthony Walsh from the criminal Justice Department at Boise State university in idaho, uSa. “this is the kind of “genetic determinism” that liberals have worried themselves silly over. they just have to take one or two neuroscience and genetic classes to dispense with their ‘my genes/neurons’ made me do it. Nothing relieves one of the obligation to behave civilized.”