A Study On Twins, Twins Separated At Birth Through Adoption

Everyday a different crime is committed; however, the reason or motive behind it is not always understood. Over the years, theories were developed to explain why certain crime occurs. For example, Andrea Yates was a mother of 5 who drowned her children due to a mental illness she endured, but there are many theories that play a vital role in explaining why she committed this crime. The theories that will be discussed throughout this paper are the Biosocial Trait Theory and the General Strain Theory.

Biological Theories have been related to crime for a long time. The Biological Theory talks about how one’s brain has an impact on committing crime or not. Dr. Jim Fallon, a neuroscientist from California talks about the biological influences in a brain. He believes that the combination of three major aspects can determine whether someone is psychopathic or not. Fallon states a combination of genes, damage to the person 's brain and the environment surrounding the individual will have the biggest impact on a person (Fallon, 2009). A real world example of the biological theory in full effect was the crimes of David Berkowitz, aka “Son of Sam. Berkowitz was accused and found guilty of killing over 6 people in New York City. After being convicted and locked up for a few years, studies had shown that Berkowitz had been diagnosed with schizophrenia. Berkowitz also claimed that his neighbor’s dog, Sam had told him to do the killings as well (Biography). Comparing the Biological theory to my own life was pretty simple because there is a genetic factor that runs in my dad’s side and that is tempers. Tempers tend to flare fairly easy, and luckily so far there has no issues with the law, however like Fallon had said, with the right combination, anyone is possible to commit a crime at any time. I feel like in a biological theory, this would have a major impact on my life

The term ‘personality’ is generally used to refer to relatively stable characteristics of a person that make their behaviour consistent across situations (but many other definitions are possible, depending on the approach being taken). Hans Eysenck (1964) put forward a theory of criminal behaviour based on a very influential theory of personality he had earlier devised. Although this theory is usually referred to as a personality theory of offending, it is important to appreciate that Eysenck’s theory conceives of criminal behaviour as the outcome of interactions between processes occurring at several different levels of explanation.

Martens, W. H. (2000). Antisocial and psychopathic Personality Disorders: Causes, Course, and Remission- A Review Artical. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminolgy , 44(4), 406-430.

If a person has a bad relationship with his or her parents, they don't have a commitment to something positive, they think negative of authorities, and they are involved in negative activities, then the person will have a greater chance of becoming a criminal. Essentially what this theory is trying

No one can be certain whether nature or nurture is the cause for criminal behavior. However, research has stated that it is more often an interaction between genes and the environment that predicts criminal behavior (Jones, 2005). Through a biological perspective, it is determined that criminal behavior is due to genetics and/or neurological conducts. It concludes that criminals are born due to their criminal traits being passed down through genetic or chromosomal mutation. Another explanation of criminal behavior within the biological perspective are the neurochemicals within our brains and body. There many regulated chemicals in the brain that determines thought process, perception and action. Like the arguments for genetic and chromosomal mutation, any abnormal anomalies or chemical imbalance can heavily impact behavior (Schram, 2018). This goes for any damages to some parts of the brain that controls emotions, reason and logic. Problems with the biological perspective are the following: 1. It provide little explanations for a small of minority of offenders with specific conditions (Levitt, 2013). 2. Disregard the effect of environmental influences and life experiences that also impact behavior. 3. Since criminality is based on biology, it is unchangeable, therefore, no one is to be blamed for their actions. Lastly, 4. Famous studies on biological factors of criminality (ex: the twin, family and adoption studies) maintained an intertwined relationship with social

Introduction The purpose of this study is to compare and contrast the constructs of psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder. The aim is to highlight whether the terms psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder reflect the same construct or whether they differ. Furthermore, recommendations for treatment of criminal behavior will be explored. For the purposes of this evaluation some definitions need to be highlighted: Criminal offence is an act that breaks a law, which relates how to behave in society. The harm caused by the act is seen to be against society as a whole, not just a specific person. Sometimes it refers to the specific law that was broken (Herring, 2009). Crime is the breach of rules or law for which some authority

The concept of psychopathy originated in the 1800s to describe individuals that consistently failed to conform to societal norms and exhibited antisocial behavior that did not fit the concept of mental illness of the time period. While, psychopathy was a common term used to describe individuals suffering from this disorder other descriptions were coined such as “Pinel’s term “manie sans delvie” meaning mania without delirium in the 1700s, to describe patents whose ‘affective faculties were disordered’” or Pritchard’s term “moral insanity” (Ogloff 520). In the 1930’s Partridge argued that psychopathy was a social rather than a mental disorder and proposed that the concept of sociopathy be introduced as a more accurate description. The American Psychological Association adopted Partridge’s term for their Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel in 1952. However, in 1968 the American Psychological Association changed the diagnostic label from sociopath to “personality disorder, antisocial” for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel – II that continued through to the DSM - III in 1980 and the DSM - III-R in 1987 and the DSM - IV in 1994. Today the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel categorizes antisocial personality disorder as a personality disorder and it is named as such. Unfortunately, not much research has been conducted

The Biological and Psychological Trait Theories are theories that are used to try and explain deviance. Biological Trait Theory stems from the Italian School of Criminology (mid-nineteenth century), head by criminologist Cesare Lombroso. Lombroso argued that criminality was a biological trait found in humans. Lombroso’s idea of atavism connected an individual’s appearance and their biological inclination to criminal activity. The Psychological Trait Theory focused on the mental aspects of explaining criminal activity by evaluating their intelligence, personality, and learning behavior. There are three subunits of the Psychological Trait Theory, which are the psychodynamic theory, behavioral theory, and cognitive theory. Sigmund Freud developed the psychodynamic theory with his research of the conscious, preconscious, and unconscious functions of the mind. The behavioral theory is about developing human actions through learning experiences. It explains that crime is learned from life situations. People aren’t born with violent tendencies, rather it’s learned from life experiences. Three sources of this behavior are family, the media, and the environment. Cognitive theory focuses on how people perceive and mentally represent the world around them and solve problems. In the case of Jared Loughner, the psychological trait theory is the most applicable. With his diagnosis of being a paranoid schizophrenic, that connects him to both the psychodynamic perspective and

The biological theories are essential to the criminal justice profession so that they won't assume that a person's genetic characteristics cause a person to commit a crime. However, there are born criminals and “these types of criminals are the most dangerous, and can be identified through his or her stigmata or identifying characteristics” (Akers, Sellers, See, & Kieser, 2013, p. 10). Biological theories are the bases for severe criminal behavior mostly found among people who are born with an innate impulse to commit a

The principles of the biological theories allow us the understanding that all biological theories should evaluate common factors that relate to each other from one biological theory to the other (Schmalleger, 2012). The first parts of the biological theory assess the importance for the theories to make a connection between criminal behavior and the human brain and a person’s personality and the studies of neurology and neurochemistry. This meaning that a person’s ability to control antisocial behavior stems from their environment and the and family genes gives the person directly into right and wrong. There is also a standard that should evaluate the connection between different groups such a sex and racial makeup that that of criminal behavior as well as human instinctive behavior (Dretske, 2014). The link between the evolutionary development of a person criminal behavior or ability to

Cognitive theory also explains the lack of remorse common in people with antisocial personality disorder by hypothesizing that those with the disorder genuinely cannot recognize a point of view other than their own. Based on the views of the biological perspective of psychology, antisocial personality disorder is a result of deficient functioning in the frontal lobe of the brain, explaining the lack of ability to plan ahead, strategize efficiently, experience sympathy, or

However, while the overstimulation of the Id and the failure to acquire and develop the the Ego and SuperEgo leads to criminal tendencies, while aggression may be out of adaptive values, and while genetic studies have pointed towards the influence of genes and criminal behaviour, these theories alone are insufficient to account for crime. Evolutionary theory does not explain or predict for the extreme degrees of aggression in individuals nor has the genetic theory proven for 100% heritability; which raises the need for us to examine the Nurture camp of crime theories as well.

Researchers have also looked at criminal behavior from a genetic aspect. In fact, "behavioral genetic research has show that genes influence individual differences in a wide range of human behaviors -cognition, academic achievement, personality and temperament (including such traits as aggression and hostility), psychopathology, and even vocational interests and social attitudes" (Meadows, 2010, P.16). There may in fact be a connection between how an individual is wired and the behavior that results. This does not necessarily mean that some individuals are inevitably going to become a criminal. However, some individuals may simply have a greater tendency "to be more aggressive and thus less likely to control emotions absent some type of positive interventions" (Meadows, 2010, P. 16). Furthermore, genetic research looks at the heritability of certain disorders and specific genes that

A controversial topic that has stumped everyone to have a certain opinion on is whether it is a good or bad idea to separate twins or triplets apart to see how they live life. Most people feel neutral when it comes to this topic because their are some things that are interesting to test out on twins or triplets, however, it’s also has its cons that includes that the children shouldn’t be separated from each other, it’s not fair to the adoptive parents to not know what’s going on, and many other reasons.