•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Sometimes a new solution is the best way to fix an old problem. Currently, relying on a case from the early nineteenth century, North Carolina courts refuse to consider an individual's cognitive disability when determining whether she acted reasonably in a negligence case. In other words, juries are instructed to hold a mentally disabled individual to the same duty of care they would use to judge an able-minded individual. Litigants are not allowed to discuss their clients' mental disabilities. This puts a great perspective strain on mentally disabled individuals who are already among the most disenfranchised groups in America.

This Comment discusses using modern neurological mapping technology to present mental disabilities as physical disabilities, which advocates are permitted to submit to a jury. Therefore, the jury is not judging a cognitively disabled individual against an unobtainable standard. Instead, it is considering the effects of differing neural anatomy and judging a defendant against a similar person in a similar situation.

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.