[science] 87% of young offenders have history of traumatic brain injury
- Thread starter cheesyboy
- Start date
Or we work with them to develop non violent or socially damaging coping mechanisms.
A huge amount of social work is focusing on helping people move on from unhelpful coping mechanisms* so it's not like there isn't a basis to work from.
*self harm, self medication etx
Well it's been pointed out for a while that as a society we've moved from a culture that used to repair and maintain possessions to one that views them as disposable and just replaces them when they break.
It's rather disturbing to see that mentality extended to people too.
Brain damage in the prefrontal cortex would have course increase the chance of criminal behaviour, it's the part of the brain often described as the inhibitor.
With reduced function here a person would be more likely to act out of rash emotional states instead of being able to pause & reason a response.
One key thing here is to distinguish that simply knowing what the causes are, isn't excusing it in a sense of letting people off.
If person A is a criminal due to brain damage or as a result of thoughtful deliberation (no injury) - what society must do in some cases is similar. We can still lock a person up if they are a risk to the public, the key difference is that protection of the public should be the primary factor, not some outmoded concept of 'justice'.
People always assume that this will result in people getting shorter times, but in reality - there is just as strong of an argument to say that in some cases people who are beyond repair with brain damage in that region of the brain should be held indefinitely for the protection of the public.
Using the best science we have today to make a rational judgement call on how we should deal with offenders should always trump political swings (left or right wing)
With reduced function here a person would be more likely to act out of rash emotional states instead of being able to pause & reason a response.
One key thing here is to distinguish that simply knowing what the causes are, isn't excusing it in a sense of letting people off.
If person A is a criminal due to brain damage or as a result of thoughtful deliberation (no injury) - what society must do in some cases is similar. We can still lock a person up if they are a risk to the public, the key difference is that protection of the public should be the primary factor, not some outmoded concept of 'justice'.
People always assume that this will result in people getting shorter times, but in reality - there is just as strong of an argument to say that in some cases people who are beyond repair with brain damage in that region of the brain should be held indefinitely for the protection of the public.
Using the best science we have today to make a rational judgement call on how we should deal with offenders should always trump political swings (left or right wing)
i would be fine with that, but the danger is if you say people are criminals because of some unchangeable medical condition, then that means that it may be pointless to try and rehabilitate and go for a more 'permanent' way of managing them.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2011
- Posts
- 4,418
- Location
- Cambridgeshire
But equally if this turns out to be the case (and I'm incredibly dubious given the sample size qouted for the other study) then we can twin incarceration with treatment, hopefully reducing the instances of re-offending and removing the danger to society.
Like I said though, I get the feeling this might be a bit pie in the sky.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,505
Young women offenders in prison in Northern Ireland will be a low number to begin with.
A Uk wide study would prove interesting.
There's a more compelling correlation between exposure to lead (either through atmospheric pollution or water pipes) in childhood and crime rates. It may be that there is a link between these two theories in that both lead exposure and head trauma will have an impact on brain development
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,798
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
Quite the opposite, if you know the likely cause is medical and you can detect that early then you can design treatments and rehabilitation methods that reduce risks through better coping mechanisms etc.
No one has said it's unchangeable other than yourself.
Of course, treatment & rehabilitation should always be the first port of call. But we should on-top of that have an honest view on the possibility of the individual contributing to society in at least some form before letting them out either.
The rational approach is apolitical, on one side focusing on treating those we're able to, implement preventative polices & the other ensuring high risk violent offenders are kept locked up.
The sample size may be statistically significant - you don't need a huge sample if the ratio compared to the base population is vastly higher. Besides, this isn't new insight. Damage to certain parts of the brain has been linked to violence/extreme violence & murder in various other studies historically anyway.
Beating & abusing children (particularly when it involves blunt trauma to the head - vastly increases the likelihood of that person being a violent criminal when they grow up. It's not really that controversial.
People who have role models that use violence, go on to use violence themselves in later life.
i think thats potentially how other people might interpret it if you blame the crime on a biological mechanism beyond the persons control.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,697
- Location
- Shropshire
So he has no published qualifications and the survey is a farce then? Does the EU fund this "research"?
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,505
Have you enquired and found it to be the case that he has no doctorate?
BIological impulse would imply to me they are "forced" to do it, rather than (what it sound like to me) a reduced sense of right and wrong due to the damage caused.
It could certainly be used to help push the rehabilitation, rather than punishment, angle of prison if accurate.
they didn't need a scientific study, i live in northern ireland and can confirm most young men now are brain damaged, even the none crime commiting ones!
Which does bring up an interesting question, what is the in the general population, and how does it differ.
Presumably the assumption would be it's much lower, but is there a study that shows this?
take walk round any town in northern ireland and observe the young males in their natural habitat......i dobut it's that much lower!
Looking at the link you provided he has been a researcher on Brain damage since 2004 (first publication of 45), a supervisor a number of PhD students and a lecturer at a Russell Group university. Even if they've lied about his PhD it's unlikely he's some flunky with no knowledge on his particular subject.
Well all crime is a biological mechanism beyond a person's control.
Unless you belive in a soul thst is capable of influencing the physical reality of your brain to make effect come before cause.
Our minds are simply hindsight along for the ride as we cannot possibly prempt the chemical and physicsl reactions that give rise to our thoughts and actions, we are the result of those reactions.
Of course dont confuse our lack of conscious freewill as a removal of consequences.