Asserting scientific authority. Cognitive development and adolescent legal rights.
The APA uses amicus briefs to communicate scientific knowledge to the legal system. There can be tension, however, between promoting the social good through law and the disinterested reporting of scientific data. This article examines this conflict by discussing two APA amicus briefs filed in the United States Supreme Court in cases involving adolescents' abortion rights. The Court has restricted adolescents' rights to make important life decisions in part because adolescents have been presumed to lack competence and maturity. The briefs argued that developmental theory and data confirm that adolescents and adults have equivalent decision-making capacities. The scientific arguments in the briefs, however, do not justify this assertion. Analysis of the briefs illuminates some dimensions describing the role of a scientific statement in a legal brief. These dimensions identify ways to limit scientific claims about the evidence at hand to avoid overstatement. The primary danger of overstatement is that it undermines psychology's claim to expert authority in assisting in the formation of law and the shaping of social institutions.
Gardner
W
W
Scherer
D
D
Tester
M
M
D000028:Abortion, Induced; D002657:Child Development; D003657:Decision Making; D006801:Humans; D010344:Patient Advocacy / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D011584:Psychology; D000297:Psychology, Adolescent; D012958:Societies, Scientific; D014481:United States