Psychopaths: Article Analysis

Expert witnesses from the case of Kjeldsen (1981) state that even though psychopaths are not able to experience remorse or guilt for their victims, they have the mental abilities to appreciate the nature and quality of the actions (Verdun-Jones, Criminal Law in Canada, 2015, p. 209). That is, in other words, psychopaths are to have capabilities to understand as well as foresee the physical consequences of their actions, despite not being able to understand the psychological damage created towards their victims (Verdun-Jones, Criminal Law in Canada, 2015, p.

“Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by an inability to form human attachment, aggressive narcissism, and antisocial behavior defined by a constellation of affective, interpersonal and behavioral characteristics, most of which society views as pejorative” [1]. Some of these characteristics include irresponsibility, grandiosity, cunning, deceitfulness, selective impulsivity, sexual promiscuity, lack of empathy, etc. People who are psychopathic display not only antisocial behavior but also emotional impairment such as the lack of guilt. They are able to prey on others using their charm, deceit, violence or any other methods that allow them to get what they want. A strong feature of most of the behavior

As someone who feels that no one is above the law, I have some reservations about completely changing sentencing guidelines so that two people who inflict the same harm receive drastically different punishments merely based on the states of their brains. Furthermore, because an increasing number of people are being diagnosed with various mild mental illnesses (depression, bipolar disorder, etc.), this may end conventional guidelines for sentencing. Because of the availability of psychologists for examinations and the potential for human error, I’m concerned about the potential for unequal judgment and sentencing. That being said, I do believe that this modification of the legal system will be most fair to criminal that have been driven towards crime by their difficult-to-control psychology, and can actually be implemented quite easily. One of the primary determining factors of a criminal’s culpability and appropriate sentence is their mens rea, or guilty mind, a spectrum of criminal liability ranging from accidental to premeditated. At the very least, the biology of a criminal’s brain could be introduced in court to mitigate the mens rea and therefore assign a more lenient and appropriate sentence. This gradual introduction could serve as an experimental gateway for the criminal justice system to begin implementing neuroscience as a foundation for sentencing and

However, more recently, a study led by King’s College London has claimed that there are differences between the brains of psychopaths and other criminal offenders diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder. Dr. Nigel Blackwood who led the research is quoted as saying “We describe those without psychopathy as 'hot-headed' and those with psychopathy as ‘cold-hearted’.” This statement shows a clear distinction between what should be interpreted as a lack of self-control and ability to repress impulses and what should be diagnosed as psychopathy.
The study took MRI scans of 66 men, two thirds of which were offenders who had been diagnosed with antisocial personality whilst the other third were non-offenders considered to not have any personality disorders. Of the 44 offenders, 17 met the diagnosis criteria for psychopathy (ASPD+P) assessed by the guidelines stated in the DSM-IV. Researchers saw that the members of the study diagnosed as psychopaths had notably less grey matter in areas associated with moral behaviour and understanding other peoples’

Should criminals with brain defects be held legally responsible for their criminal actions? Advances in what scientist is able to learn about the brain through imaging, has changed how the legal system thinks about this query. We know now from various types of advancements in brain scan imaging that the brain of a psychopath looks different than the brain of a non-psychopathic brain. These defects are thought to be responsible for the personality and actions of the psychopath and some believe these defects are just as responsible for the criminal actions of the psychopath as well. However, while behavioral science may look at the brain of the psychopath and seek explanations for the antisocial and aggressive personality traits-in

Scientist have tried to find out what makes a psychopath and are still trying to get a better insight in their minds. An important question is that is it nature or nurture or both that contributes to someone being a psychopath. Can we blame it all on neurochemistry or has environment got a role to play in it too? this gives rise to another question, does the brain of a psychopath resemble the brain of a normal human being?

Psychopaths pose a challenge for theorists as to their debatable degree of moral and legal responsibility for their actions, as the capacities needed to assign such attributions to an individual may not be present. As psychopaths are able to see the world as it is with no delusions of a false reality they are able to practically apply reason in an effort to pursue their own goals. However, they seem unable to maintain control of their behaviours when placed in a moral situation when their goals are in congruence with the morally negligent path. This is due to their lack of empathy and an inability to see purpose in treating others in a morally acceptable

Psychopathy; a term used to describe an individual with the ability to differentiate between right and wrong and acknowledge the rules of society, but are impervious to the moral foundation of these rules. Unlike other mental disorders such as sociopathy and schizophrenia, psychopathic individuals are able to understand actions that violate the law or go against social norms (Glenn 1). Although, they may be able to accurately judge moral and/or legal violations, one major factor that they lack is – emotional capacity. It is estimated that about 1% of the general population is made up of psychopaths, which is a considerable risk when it comes to crimes (Parry n.p). Therefore, the way in which the law responses to psychopathic individuals is an important moral and empirical issue. With that being said, should psychopaths be held criminally responsible for their behavior? Due to psychopathic individuals failure to meet criteria necessary for moral responsibility, such as the lack of understanding of the human race, predetermined biological structures of the brain and the fact that psychopathy is

I definitely believe that number of legal and ethical issues could arise by labeling someone a psychopath from this assessment. Using this type of assessment in the hiring process is bias and invades ones privacy. This assessment is not 100% accurate therefore it would not be fair to base someone’s job opportunity on the line based on an assessment like this. I have no doubt that someone who is labeled a psychopath would no be the first one picked for a job position. Applying this assessment to hiring processes would defeat the purpose of equal job opportunity for people

I've looked at alot of background of serial killers and cannibals a very large amount have had troubled childhoods. I believe that childhood experience is what drove them to kill a person. I have read some a article named “20 Of The Most Notorious Killers The World Has Ever Seen” and in this article its talks about Aileen Wuornos also know as “The Monster”. She killed seven men and she claimed they tried to rape her or had already done so. She worked as a prostitute in Florida. She had admitted to killing these men and was sentenced to death row she died in 1992 by lethal injection. What drove her to do this? What made her so mad or angry to want to kill over and over again?

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

According to the “Psychopathy” article “psychopathy is a mental disorder marked by affective, interpersonal and behavioral abnormalities”. Meaning people who are psychopathy show the “incapacity for empathy, guilt, and chronic violation of social, moral and legal norms”. One of the main questions about someone who is psychopathy has been if they are morally and legally responsible for their criminal actions. I feel that they should be criminally responsible for their actions and their mental status should not play role on their ruling if they are found guilty or not. I agree with The American Psychiatric Association when they write “is the job of the judge or jury [not psychiatrists] to determine criminal responsibility”. Psychopath are not likely to be incompetent to stand trial because they are not sure they have done anything wrong. Although others argue that psychopaths are in touch with reality and are aware of their doings because they have the ability to fee pain and that pain will have

Most are environmental factors that influence the way that they react to different types of situations. A lot of psychopaths are not inherently that way. Some examples and common ways that people become influenced are traumatization, experiencing negative childhood, being around negative people for extended periods of time. Being traumatized (more likely during childhood) is one of the single most prevalent factors that influence a person’s thinking. Whether they were abused as a child or experienced a whole lot of violence during said childhood also influences a person’s mind. A person can become a psychopath by heredity. They are influenced by someone else, most likely their parents, from a very early age. Another factor that comes into play that can and has caused a person to have this disorder is abuse of drugs and/or alcohol. The influence of drugs and alcohol can very easily escalate the symptoms of a person that already has the mental disorder. A person with alcohol in their system is vulnerable to misconduct and a psychopath is already amoral and cannot think clearly or rationally, so drugs and alcohol just makes things worse (Gorenstein, 1979, p. 207). In several different studies it has been shown that the heredity of personality type disorders has also been affiliated with Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD). In the study researchers found that psychopathic traits were more

When most people hear the word psychopath their mind forms a picture of a wild-eyed, rambling, lunatic who is often restrained in a straitjacket. The media has helped this belief along the way with slasher horror films and grisly CSI episodes depict these strange humans. However, the average psychopath is much harder to spot than most people believe. In fact, most of them are extremely difficult to distinguish from ordinary humans. They outwardly appear normal and many do not find it difficult to blend into common society. They can interact with others, hold successful jobs, and effectively keep themselves out of trouble. Most are not the sadistic killers many people think they are. Psychopaths are people born with problems (Bartol 105) or

Psychopaths can seem just like you or me, but when you are not around them this is when their mental disorder kicks in. Psychopaths that have been put in jail committed three times as many crimes per year then non-psychopaths. 97% of convicted psychopathic criminals cause at least one violent crime compared to 74% of non-psychopaths. Psychopaths are shown to be more violence throughout their entire life compared to a regular people. Psychopaths tend to have a greater chance of failing on parole and mandatory supervision and have a faster rate of failing then non-psychopaths. Psychopathy predicts recidivism on conditional release as well as or better than do actuarial risk instruments. Psychopaths recidivate at a rate of three to four times higher than that of non-psychopaths.