This presentation addresses a fundamental issue at stake in this symposium: Notwithstanding whether brain imaging is an ethical time bomb or not, who should deal with it in policy terms and how? Firstly, I will briefly outline lessons learned from the Brain Imaging Dialogue process that took place in Scotland during 2010, and which brought together a range of participants including scientists, technicians, health practitioners, legal experts, social scientists, policy makers and members of the public to discuss the social and policy implications of current and future non-medical uses of brain imaging. Secondly, I will argue that, in a democracy, the appropriate way to deal with an issue of this nature is through substantial public engagement. In other words, it is no longer enough that expert and policy elites shape the way we govern an array of technologies that bring with them such fundamental ethical, social and political challenges. Insofar we are talking about values and good practice, considered judgement by citizens must be at the heart of any process that seeks to legitimately address those challenges in policy terms. Accordingly, I will conclude by proposing the use of democratic innovations such as deliberative ‘mini-publics’ (e.g. consensus conferences, citizen juries, planning cells, citizen assemblies, deliberative polls) in order to address this issue and make informed policy through meaningful public engagement.