東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁 到查詢結果 [ subject:"History of Science." ]

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

The introduction, contestation, and ...

Aronson, Jay David.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The introduction, contestation, and regulation of forensic DNA analysis in the American legal system (1984--1994).

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	The introduction, contestation, and regulation of forensic DNA analysis in the American legal system (1984--1994)./
作者:	Aronson, Jay David.
面頁冊數:	530 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 65-08, Section: A, page: 3136.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International65-08A.
標題:	History of Science. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3144244
ISBN:	0496023209

The introduction, contestation, and regulation of forensic DNA analysis in the American legal system (1984--1994).
Aronson, Jay David.

The introduction, contestation, and regulation of forensic DNA analysis in the American legal system (1984--1994). - 530 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 65-08, Section: A, page: 3136.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Minnesota, 2004.

When viewed from the present day, forensic DNA analysis stands out as one of the few biotechnologies to have lived up to the hype that surrounding its public debut. In many ways, however, the success of technique has obscured its controversial early history. Most importantly, recent accounts of DNA typing describe it as a novel technology that had an immediate revolutionary impact as soon as it was transferred from the research laboratory to the criminal justice system. These accounts also ignore the crucial role that lawyers played in the development of the technique. In this dissertation, I explore the various pathways through which DNA typing emerged, evolved, and was contested in the United States from 1984 to 1994. I focus on the disputes and negotiations among biotechnology firms, forensic scientists, law enforcement agencies, lawyers, judges, academic scientists, and legislators about the proper means to ensure the quality, validity and reliability of DNA evidence. I argue that the history of the technique represents the hybridization of knowledge and practice from various legal sources, corporate culture, and a multiplicity of scientific disciplines. DNA evidence was not simply a product of science being introduced into the legal system; instead, it was "co-produced" through the interactions of actors in multiple disciplines and institutions over the course of a 12-year period. Understanding this complex history of forensic DNA analysis, and especially the role that lawyers played in shaping its development from 1987 to the mid-1990s, sheds light on some frequently neglected aspects of the interaction of science and the law. It highlights the extent to which expertise is constructed within the courtroom setting, and how this process not only aids legal problem solving but also has a profound impact on the scientific community and its work. It also shows that lawyers had agency in the development of the technique. Finally, it provides judges who must rule on the admissibility of scientific evidence with a deeper understanding of the process through which new technologies develop within the legal context.

ISBN: 0496023209Subjects--Topical Terms:

896972
History of Science.

The introduction, contestation, and regulation of forensic DNA analysis in the American legal system (1984--1994).
LDR:03065nmm 2200277 4500 001 1840387
005 20050721103005.5
008 130614s2004 eng d
020 $a 0496023209
035 $a (UnM)AAI3144244
035 $a AAI3144244
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Aronson, Jay David. $3 1928728
245 1 4 $a The introduction, contestation, and regulation of forensic DNA analysis in the American legal system (1984--1994).
300 $a 530 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 65-08, Section: A, page: 3136.
500 $a Adviser: John Beatty.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Minnesota, 2004.
520 $a When viewed from the present day, forensic DNA analysis stands out as one of the few biotechnologies to have lived up to the hype that surrounding its public debut. In many ways, however, the success of technique has obscured its controversial early history. Most importantly, recent accounts of DNA typing describe it as a novel technology that had an immediate revolutionary impact as soon as it was transferred from the research laboratory to the criminal justice system. These accounts also ignore the crucial role that lawyers played in the development of the technique. In this dissertation, I explore the various pathways through which DNA typing emerged, evolved, and was contested in the United States from 1984 to 1994. I focus on the disputes and negotiations among biotechnology firms, forensic scientists, law enforcement agencies, lawyers, judges, academic scientists, and legislators about the proper means to ensure the quality, validity and reliability of DNA evidence. I argue that the history of the technique represents the hybridization of knowledge and practice from various legal sources, corporate culture, and a multiplicity of scientific disciplines. DNA evidence was not simply a product of science being introduced into the legal system; instead, it was "co-produced" through the interactions of actors in multiple disciplines and institutions over the course of a 12-year period. Understanding this complex history of forensic DNA analysis, and especially the role that lawyers played in shaping its development from 1987 to the mid-1990s, sheds light on some frequently neglected aspects of the interaction of science and the law. It highlights the extent to which expertise is constructed within the courtroom setting, and how this process not only aids legal problem solving but also has a profound impact on the scientific community and its work. It also shows that lawyers had agency in the development of the technique. Finally, it provides judges who must rule on the admissibility of scientific evidence with a deeper understanding of the process through which new technologies develop within the legal context.
590 $a School code: 0130.
650 4 $a History of Science. $3 896972
650 4 $a Law. $3 600858
690 $a 0585
690 $a 0398
710 2 0 $a University of Minnesota. $3 676231
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 65-08A.
790 1 0 $a Beatty, John, $e advisor
790 $a 0130
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2004
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3144244