The sooner we move away from instead of automatically hating criminals & instead moving towards hating the actions they do, we can start to look at undesirable behaviour the same way we do any other public health issue.
Hating the person isn't useful is the point, it goes from a useful assessment of how to handle undesirable behaviour & crosses into justification for revenge/other forms of punishment that exasperate criminality & prevent rehabilitation.The person and their actions are inextricably linked. I don't murder and rape because it is not part of my person to do so. If that is within another person, why shouldn't we ostracise them? Clearly they have undesirable traits.
I find the desire to simplify complex systems into easy to understand & ultimately incorrect views equally bizarre.People are very keen these days to categorise all deviant and criminal behaviour as a mental health issue. It's bizarre.
I'm listening. I assume you don't have children also?
If you did you would know each child from the day they are born have their own unique personalities and traits.
Also you should know that people are heavily effected by environmental factor.s So what am I missing here?
People are very keen these days to categorise all deviant and criminal behaviour as a mental health issue. It's bizarre.
People are very keen these days to categorise all deviant and criminal behaviour as a mental health issue. It's bizarre.
Well according to Rolf Harris, jail is like a country club.
Might be opening a whole nasty tin of worms here but here goes.
Isn't paedophilia considered a mental problem and/or addiction? The fact that they often reoffend even after being released from prison would certainly suggest it, in which case shouldnt offenders be treated rather than just punished?
I am in no way condoning his actions and feel imprisonment is justified but it opens up yet another debate of people with drug addictions who are jailed and stigmatised for something, which in their mind, is out of their control.
As far as I know, there are no "rehabs" for such a crime which continues down this countries line of punishment over trying to actually fix the problem, which they never will with the current approach because of the sheer tabboo over the subject.
Because lets face it, if you felt these dark feelings, would you go public with them to try and get help after looking at the above comments? Hell no, you'd probably get lynched by the doctor first!
The person and their actions are inextricably linked. I don't murder and rape because it is not part of my person to do so. If that is within another person, why shouldn't we ostracise them? Clearly they have undesirable traits.
People are very keen these days to categorise all deviant and criminal behaviour as a mental health issue. It's bizarre.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I also recall one element of a mental health disorder is when the condition impends on ones ability to function within society (in one form or another).Mental relates to the mind.
Health is an absence of disease or injury.
Diseases are disorders in structure/function that cause specific symptoms.
Therefore something that causes specific symptoms, that are not found in large proportion of the population, is a disease and when that disease is associated with the mind then I think it's fair to label it as a mental health issue by pure definition.
Indeed, the data surrounding the history of most abusers & murders is one of victim-hood if you go far back enough. It's sad but people confuse wanting to understand the underline causes (and therefore wanting to prevent) as being akin to wanting to let rapists & murderers run riot.Bro, do you even phrenology?
What proportion of murders and rapists would you guess have mental health issues? Isn't there a value in understanding and addressing that as both prevention and rehabilitation?
It's someone else I'm talking about. I haven't been arrested for touching up kids......
...yet!
I do have children. I have 5 and I fail to see how it changes the argument.
You've said nature vs nurture. That's a simplistic way of looking at it and not correct. Nature and nurture both effect each other to create an end result.
A child born with a genetic potential of athletic build can be starved. They will then become underweight, their genes then recognise that and shape metabolic pathways that cause other genes to build different proteins that tell the body to store any excess food where possible, when food intake increases when they are older, those pathways that wouldn't be present without that environmental starvation are still active so the tendency to store food as fat is there. Our now genetic athletic kid has grown into an obese adult who dies early of cardiovascular disease. All of that is mutable along the way. There was not 'nature vs nurture' here is wasn't adversarial it was complimentary one feeding back into the other.
We have to remember selection and consequences are measured at the phenotype. The phenotype is a symbiosis of both (in the main with the odd exception). Saying 'nature vs nurture' is like saying 'survival of the fittest'. It's not correct. It's a hangover to stupid arguments last century where both side wanted exclusive rights on the destiny of men.
Interesting. Your saying that both nature and nurture both mutually existst to effect the outcome. If so how can you come to such a conclusion, some would regard that theory as quite divine.
does he even mix with regular prisoners? he's probably in a special paedo wing for mps where they all tell stories about children whilst watching reruns of blue peter
I don't believe in the death penalty, but I think they should all be locked up for life. They are such abhorrent crimes which tend to have incredibly damaging life long impacts on the victims.
so whens your court date?
There is a logical way of looking at it.
We lock people up because we deem them to be a danger to society or if the time in prison would aid rehabilitation. We ensure the prison isn't barbaric & we tailor it to rehabilitate those who we are able to, or leave those we are not for the good of everybody else.
The sooner we move away from instead of automatically hating criminals & instead moving towards hating the actions they do, we can start to look at undesirable behaviour the same way we do any other public health issue.
What should matter is prevention & protecting the public - everything else is pretty meaningless & downright irresponsible if it endangers more people in the long term.
I can't take credit for not being a psychopath, neither can I take credit for being attracted to adult women as opposed to children - I didn't pick either of these things. I highly doubt anybody picks who they are attracted to, that sadly includes paedophiles.
One could argue we should stop our hysteria regarding the hatred of them - as we are essentially preventing people from seeking help (who may want to control the urges but fear repercussions/violence from declaring it).
I have no idea what the populations are regarding this, but there will be a number - I recall reading about a number requesting chemical castration (as they know the thoughts they have are wrong, but also know they can't control their urges).