Search results

Neuroscientific research on addictions has prompted a paradigm shift from a moral to a medical understanding – with substantial implications for legal professionals’ interactions with and decision-making surrounding individuals with addiction. This study complements prior work on US defense attorney’s understandings of addiction by investigating two further perspectives: the potential “next generation” of legal professionals in the USA (criminal justice undergraduates) and legal professionals from another system (Germany). This paper aims to assess their views on the brain disease model of addiction, dominance and relevance of this model, the responsibility of affected persons and preferred sources of information.

Views of 74 US criminal justice undergraduate students and 74 German legal professionals were assessed using Likert scales and open-ended questions in an online survey.

Neuroscientific research findings on addictions and views that addiction is a brain disease were rated as significantly more relevant by American students to their potential future work than by German legal professionals. However, a majority of both samples agreed that addiction is a brain disease and that those affected are responsible for their condition and actions. Sources of information most frequently used by both groups were publications in legal academic journals.

In the USA, information for legal professionals needs to be expanded and integrated into the education of its “next generation,” while in Germany it needs to be developed and promoted. Legal academic journals appear to play a primary role in the transfer of research on addiction into legal practice.

This study complements prior work on US defense attorney’s understandings of addiction by investigating two further perspectives.