Myths About Criminals

[Thunderwolf, MSN, RN]

i briefly mentioned this book in another thread. i read it many years ago, finding it both instructive as well as enlightening.

the book: inside the criminal mind by dr. stanton samenow.

major premise: criminals are not mentally ill. they know what they are doing and make choices to purposely act in this manner. some professionals may be torn on this premise. some may totally agree with it. a recommended reading or book for one's personal library.

here is a brief blurb from the link: http://www.enotalone.com/article/4486.html

_______________________________________________

"in nearly a half-century, little has changed in terms of deeply ingrained beliefs about the causes of crime. in the classic, still often performed, 1957 musical west side story, stephen sondheim parodied what then was the current thinking about juvenile delinquency in the song "gee, officer krupke." delinquents were punks because their fathers were drunks. they were misunderstood rather than no good. they were suffering from a "social disease," and society "had played [them] a terrible trick." they needed an analyst, not a judge, because it was "just [their] neurosis" acting up. in short, their criminal behavior was regarded as symptomatic of a deep-seated psychological or sociological problem. in this chapter i shall briefly discuss this proposition. in subsequent chapters i shall examine them in greater detail and show that the prevalent thinking about crime has been and still is loaded with fundamental misconceptions resulting in devastating consequences for society.

a man abducts, rapes, and murders a little girl. we, the public, may be so revolted by the gruesomeness of the crime that we conclude only a sick person could be capable of such an act. but our personal gut reaction shows no insight into, or understanding of, what really went on in this individual's mind as he planned and executed the crime. true, what the perpetrator inflicted upon this child is not "normal" behavior. but what does "sick" really mean? a detailed and lengthy examination of the mind of a criminal will reveal that, no matter how bizarre or repugnant the crime, he is rational, calculating, and deliberate in his actions--not mentally ill.

criminals know right from wrong. in fact, some know the laws better than their lawyers do. but they believe that whatever they want to do at any given time is right for them. their crimes require logic and self-control."

__________

author:

stanton e. samenow, ph.d., is the author of before it's too late: why some kids get into trouble and what you can do about it. he is a clinical psychologist who has spent thirty years as a researcher, clinician, consultant, and expert witness specializing in criminal behavior. for the last eighteen years, he has served as an independent evaluator in adversarial child custody disputes. he has been appointed to three presidential task forces on law enforcement, victims' rights, and a drug-free america. he has appeared on 60 minutes, the oprah show, nbc's today show, good morning america, larry king live, and numerous other national venues. he lives in alexandria, virginia.

[Thunderwolf, MSN, RN]

Another way to view this premise proposed by the author:

In the mind of the Criminal (or Antisocial Personality Disorder, if it is to be called an illness)....the world is their own personal candy store and they feel entitled to claim their rights to partake of its fruits...regardless if their actions purposely harm others in the process.

Sound harsh?

Maybe, maybe not.

Also, the premise brings up a valid argument: Does deviant or "not normally expected" behavior necessarily mean a mental illness?...and/or does it truly come down to purposeful choices made by the individual to behave in this manner?

Illness vs Non-Illness.

One side begs psychiatric intervention...the other side begs incarceration as treatment.

The controversy continues.

[inthesky]

When I was a teenager, I had a meth-addicted boyfriend who would commit actual robbery and steal people's identities (of course I didn't know!!!! I didn't even know what meth was). I learned later that he felt entitled to not deal with the work 9-5 at a crappy job that pays little. Him feeling depressed and needing money to fuel his drug habit was a good enough reason to validate crime. He also thought that he was better than everyone and shouldn't have to work those crappy jobs. He could have done what my patients (sometimes) do: go to rehab and suck up that crappy job and take antidepressants because they have to. I try and tell patients that meth damages seritonin mechanisms so they will have to deal with a certain amount of depression for awhile.

He would give half-hearted attempts to work that 9 to 5 and get sober, but did not have the strength to follow through.

Fortunately, he did not have an antisocial personality disorder and never stole from me, never introduced me to his friends, did not get me involved in any of that dangerous crap, and never pressured me to have relations because I was underage.

I realized that I had dodged a bullet with that guy and never had a relationship with someone like that again =P I saw him about 2 years later and he was no longer the intelligent, eloquent, meticulous person I had known before, but rather was full of prison slang and emeshed into the 'lifestyle'. Every once and awhile, I wonder if I'll ever meet him again as a patient. He is more likely in jail.

sort of unrelated sorry =P

[Mr Ian]

I posted in the other thread on ASPD and Psychopathy.

I believe all behaviour is a choice.

The defence of mentally ill people is that the psychoses gives them a false perception or information by which they make that choice.

I believe anyone who knows it is wrong to commit crime and does so in the full knowledge of the true facts is culpable - even tho mitigating circumstances may prevail.

However, with psychopathy - the inability to recognise the harm they do to others is a complex matter.

We do no wrong because we know it's wrong to someone - not because someone said that's the law - but we can generally work it out.

But in psychopathy - they can't work it out.

So are they culpable?