Just a discussion

I have watched a documentary several times now about Broadmoor Hospital which is a high security psychiatric hospital in England. It has made me think about mental health and the prison system and how we view offenders in general, particularly in the US. We seem to think that someone who has committed a crime, particularly a violent one has forfeited their humanity. Yet when I hear the stories these people tell about the severe abuse and neglect they suffered as children, or how they were a child soldiers etc. I feel a great deal of empathy, sympathy, and compassion for them. I know many of them have done unspeakable acts of violence but I feel like society failed them. Additionally many of the patients are there for less violent or even non-violent offenses but they began to self-harm or had breakdowns in prison. But what do you all think? Lock the door and throw away the key, or try to rehabilitate offenders as much as is possible?

Thank you for this excellent post annoyedgrunt84. This is very important:
"We seem to think that someone who has committed a crime, particularly a violent one has forfeited their humanity."

With regard to how we view others and treat them, I always come back to Sadhguru's words:
"There are no good people or bad people. There are only joyful people and miserable people. Each of us is perpetually oscillating between darkness and light."

And you are absolutely right, when you start looking into the childhoods of violent offenders, you don't find happiness and stability and safety. There are reasons why people go down certain paths. Sam Harris (neuroscientist) has even pointed out: If you had the brain of a serial killer, you'd be killing people too!

I think Sam Harris is wrong and here’s why. I read a story recently about a neuroscientist who had on his desk the brain scans of people who had been, or currently were, in prison for murder. To his shock he discovered that he had mixed his own scan in with those of the murderers. His brain lit up just like that of a psychopath but he had never killed anyone. His family said that they always thought of him as somewhat cold and distant, maybe even manipulative, but he had never killed anyone. So it seems that it is a perfect storm of nature and nurture that turns someone violent.

I don't think Harris's comment negates that. Our brains develop via combination of nature and nurture. Brain function and behavior can't all be determined or predicted by a scan. It's too complicated. Any good neuroscientist will admit that they have not even come close to fully understanding how our brains actually work. And yes, not all psychopaths kill people. Some are doctors, CEOs etc. And not all murderers are psychopaths.

That was just one line from Harris I appreciated because I felt he was trying to say we should be careful when we judge people because if our brains functioned differently (for any reason), we could be doing very bad things too. That said, he says a lot of things on other topics that I don't agree with.

I think though there's probably a recurring problem with frontal lobe dysfunction/impaired impulse control among most (if not all?) violent offenders. That doesn't mean it was there since birth. Their brains developed in response to highly stressful environments. It has taken people a long time to realize that folks living in ghettos are probably all living with PTSD. Seems obvious but wasn't even considered for a long time. Look at what's happening in Chicago. I've met parents who used to live there: "Best I could do was get us out...else I'd have to watch my kids pick a gang...kill or be killed." Geto Boys/ 'Mind playing tricks on me' is one of the best portrayals of PTSD that I've ever heard. I live with PTSD myself. I grew up in a war zone in another country. I left a long time ago and found somewhere safe to live. Who knows what my life would look like now if I'd never changed my environment and never had therapy.

I heard of a new study indicating that living in a racist society causes chronic inflammation in the bodies of African Americans. Somewhat off-topic but just mentioning how environment can actually alter physiology.

How did I miss this conversation?

Murder is a rather specific behavior, and it would be nearly impossible to determine if someone is going to commit the very specific behavior of murder merely from a brain scan. There's a whole lot you could do with a psychopath's brain that doesn't amount to killing somebody. Many of those things are even pro-social. I've only spoken with a few psychopaths, but most of them didn't seem all that interested in murder.

People seem to be afraid of psychopaths because they lack the "inhibitions" that prevent most people from committing the act of murder, inhibitions such as empathy or remorse or squeamishness, or whatever else it is that keeps you normal folk from strangling your neighbors. What they fail to see is that it's not inhibition which keeps psychopaths from murdering people, but lack of desire. And it amuses me endlessly when so-called non-psychopaths go on about "needing inhibitions" as if they'd go on murder spree if I put one too many beers in them.

In which case, I tend to look at the person's beliefs about violence, regardless of their psychopathic traits. People who tend to glorify violence, to equate violence with power, are more likely to commit violent acts. And maybe inhibitions keep most of these people from acting on these beliefs most of the time (until they get into a drunken bar fight or something). So, following the idea of nature and nurture, a psychopath who glorifies violence is indeed a very dangerous creature. For rehabilitation, I wouldn't try to change the psychopathy. That's likely not possible as it's a part of their nature. I would instead address their glorification of violence.

Or maybe I don't really understand inhibitions or morality at all because I'm a psychopath.

I should probably put a trigger warning on this...

I've never seen empathy described as an inhibition before. I have to admit that made me smile. You think very differently from from me. Interesting

I'm not sure you need a trigger icon on a post in a thread about murder and the prison system...we aren't in Never-Never Land here

There's a book: 'Confessions of a Sociopath: a life spent hiding in plain sight' if anyone is interested. I know, in modern thinking, that sociopathy and psychopathy are different but may still be of interest to some. I didn't make it too far through before it started to make me feel sad but I'd be willing to take another stab at it some time. No pun intended.

I'm about 90% sure I worked with a psychopath at one point.

One thing that interests me is problem-solving skills. I read research from a man who studied people living with psychopathy that their problem-solving skills are off the charts. They were given real-life scenarios and developed extremely creative and unusual ways of solving the problem. Ways that people living without psychopathy would never think of. That fascinates me.

Would you care to comment on that Theoretical?

Sorry if that seems to divert your thread AnnoyedGrunt. Give me a shout and I'll step off if you like. Sometimes rare and interesting discussions just pop up on these threads..

"I tend to look at the person's beliefs about violence, regardless of their psychopathic traits. People who tend to glorify violence, to equate violence with power, are more likely to commit violent acts."

Very interesting point.

"a psychopath who glorifies violence is indeed a very dangerous creature"

So why might one psychopath glorify violence while another doesn't see the point...would you say that's for the same reasons as people who don't live with psychopathy?

I've heard similar things, and I do seem to figure things out a bit weirdly. I'll look into the topic and make a separate thread on it to see if/how psychopaths differ from the norm.

I couldn't say for certain aside from it being environmental factors. If a person grew up in a society, neighborhood, social group or family which glorified violence, they likely would as well. I couldn't even say if psychopaths are more likely to accept society's messages about violence on account of they tend to be antisocial.

How would you describe it?

"How would you describe it?"

Good question. I know this answer is different for me than for some others because they have honestly told me so. For me, empathy is a force or sensory input in my body and mind which I often wish I could switch off. But I cannot. it is there whether I seek it or not. It is frequently described in society as some sort of gift or advantage but it doesn't feel that way to me. It's not an inhibition....it typically doesn't stop me from doing things....it is more likely to compel me to do things....even when I am exhausted and don't want to do anything. It is painful. Can be physically painful and sickening or even frightening at times. Makes me aware of things that others don't see or feel. Things I wish I could be unaware of....very unpleasant things. Makes me very successful while working with people but thwarts my ability to care for myself. I don't know if that makes much sense? It is hard to convey.

Interesting. I've always heard of empathy as vicariously feeling others' feelings or something. I hadn't thought of it as a compulsion to act. Thanks for the insight.

Our minds and our thinking can be severely damaged by childhood neglect and abuse. It is all about the brain. Thus the problem is Medical in nature. Rehabilitate and healing is the only answer.

A higher degree of sadism could also play a role. Having an inherent interest in violence and all.

I think sort of unrelated to your question as im not sure by glorifying violence you're also implying acts of violence. But sadistic psychopaths probably make up most murders caused by a psychopath. Non psychopathic sadists at least have quite a few emotions as well as logic that could deter them from comitting sadistic acts on unwilling victims. While sadistic psychopaths only have logic as a detterence, the risk/reward not being worth it. Yet, a psychopath, while succumbing to the impulse, could carry out acts intelligently, while another not so intelligent one is even more likely to act on their impulse. I'd imagine one would have to be extremely sadistic, given that there are consensual options out there that i assume are probably not enough.