Psychopaths who murder their parents
Now, there’s a pleasant subject, you might say (sarcastically, I hope). But I take the topic up as a public service.
Let me explain how I came to research this. Sometimes when I’m working, either on the blog or around the house, I put the TV on as background noise. It’s often tuned to the news, but I get very tired of that, and lately I’ve sometimes been watching reruns of “Forensic Files,” an investigative series that focuses on the use of forensics in crime. It’s a sort of CSI without the glam actors: just the facts, ma’m, just the facts. I’ve found that truth is often stranger—and to me more interesting—than fiction.
The other night a segment on the Porco murder case aired. It was a murder so grisly and brutal that I’m not going to go into the details; you can find the show here, or more information here. The murderer of the father, and attempted murderer of the mother, was the Porcos’ college-age son Christopher, a handsome, intelligent young man who clearly was a psychopath and had shown signs of it for years although he had never before been violent.
I became curious about the trigger that turned Christopher Porco from non-violent to violent, and I found this fascinating article about that murder and other similar cases. It describes a group of parent-killers with a pattern similar to Porco’s. They were distinguished by having previously committed a series of petty crimes involving property (usually stealing, either money or goods or both) against the parents, a lack of remorse or change of behavior, and an escalation to violence in response to a perceived threat of exposure or punishment.
Porco, for example, had forged his father’s signature on large checks, had stolen goods from the home and tried to sell them, had falsified college transcripts, and a host of other deceptions, and his parents were aware of at least some of them. They reacted by admonishing him, trying to implement consequences, and yet assuring him they loved him. In other words, they seemed more or less to be doing the right thing. However:
There were several e-mail correspondences between Porco and his parents that exemplify the tensions between the parties and accurately support research stating that conflicts and arguments are a catalyst for parricide. The parents eventually confronted Porco on his fraudulent behavior and threatened to go to the authorities to take action against him. In one e-mail, the father wrote, “Did you forge my signature as a co-signer? What the hell are you doing? You should have called me to discuss it. ”¦ I’m calling Citibank this morning to find out what you have done and am going to tell them I’m not to be on it as co-signer” (as cited in Perri & Lichtenwald, 2008)…
…Despite the chaos Christopher Porco brought into his parents’ lives, they told him how much they loved him. Unfortunately for them, though, their love was irrelevant for what he planned to do next. Less than 2 weeks from the time the father warned Christopher Porco that he would not hesitate going to the authorities for his son’s fraudulent behavior, Christopher executed his plan to negate the threat. It has been the experience of the authors that the victim’s threat of exposing the fraud will force a shift in the psychopath’s strategy from employing charm, cunning behavior, and manipulation on the victim to employing violence in an effort to silence the victim.
The article describes other several cases with a similar pattern. It also makes some suggestions for parents, and I would think that anyone who faces a similar situation—an offspring who shows a pattern of petty exploitation, theft, and/or forgeries, especially if directed at the funds of parents—or who knows someone with a similar situation, should read it; it could save your or your friends’ lives.
I did my own research on a couple of cases in the public domain in which teenage or young adult children cold-bloodedly killed their parents—for example, the Menendez case and the Dingman case—and sure enough, they fit the pattern. Most of us remember the Menendez case, for example, but how many of us remember (I hadn’t) that the brothers were already guilty of theft committed prior to the murders?:
In 1988 the Menendez brothers became involved in a burglary and a grand theft. These burglaries were not inconsequential; they involved money, property, and some serious jewelry, in the $100,000 range, taken from the safes in neighbors’ houses.
In that case, the father learned of the theft but protected the sons by extra-judicial means rather than have them face the consequences; he returned the jewels and made monetary restitution to the neighbors.
The Menendez parents were extremely wealthy (the Porcos were middle-class, however, as were the Dingmans), and one of the motives for the murder was that the boys were the beneficiaries of the will. They apparently feared that they would be written out of the parents’ will and lose access to very substantial assets in the future. That was also a motive for Porco as well. And in the Dingman case, the older brother “was afraid Eve and Vance Dingman would find out he had stolen money and a .22-caliber pistol from the gun cabinet in their Rochester home.”
Christopher Porco never alleged that his parents had abused him. But the Menendez bothers made that accusation towards their parents and offered it as part of their defense to murder. We will never know the truth about that, but even if they did abuse their children (which I doubt for a host of reasons, but that’s outside the subject matter of the post), the young men were 21 and 18 at the time of the murders, free to come and go, and could have just left the situation and made their own lives.
The point of it all is this: be aware of the danger signs. Someone with a child behaving like that may think that a certain approach will help—love and acceptance, or its opposite tough love and consequences—but the evidence is that there is nothing the parents can do that is enough, and whatever you do it is wise to be aware and take precautions. Again, the article goes into what those precautions might be (for example, don’t give the child a key to the house or the combination to a security system, or passwords to any cyber accounts). And don’t threaten to do something like cut the child out of your will; if you’re going to do it, just do it.
This requires the jettisoning of what is probably a very natural and deep desire to deny what’s happening and the fact that you are parent to a psychopath. And of course not all children who defraud their parents go on to murder them. But realize that such a pattern of property crime and lies on the part of a child puts a parent at risk, and that the time to exercise most caution is when you are thinking of exposing the child’s crimes and having the child face the consequences of the child’s own actions.
My sister is, at the very least, a sociopath. I had to remove my mother (before she died) from the town she lived in to keep her away from this sister, who was stealing her blind – hocked all the family jewelry, was starting in on the silver – even hocked the VACUUM! The behavior began very young – when she was in high school if not younger. I now have no contact because she created a sociopathic son who used to kill frogs for fun. I don’t want to ever anger them and just want to keep them far away from me. I don’t want to trip their trigger.
I have secondhand experience of a different sort. My best friend from elementary school had very controlling parents, with a violent-tempered father and a passive-aggressive mother. (For example, she manage to convert him, an Italian Roman Catholic, to join her Baptist church!). He was smart, but sort of an Asberger personality. I grew out of touch after a few years, and his parents didn’t like mine, as they didn’t “control” him or have the same social climbing ambitions.
Well, he was in a minor peace march at university (Vietnam era). His father heard about it, threatened to force him into the military (?!) so he would “die like a man”.
He bought a rifle and shot and killed his parents while they slept. Stayed around for the police, was in a daze. Was convicted of murder, spent a decade or so in prison, was released on parole, and lived his life as well as he could. He was fragile and with malicious parents. He didn’t know his choices.
I add this to say that not all parricides are psychopaths. This was more of a case of (delusional) self-defense.
BillR:
I guess you didn’t follow the link to the article I’m referencing. It discussed three general types of parricides: the mentally ill, the victims of long-term abuse, and the psychopath. My piece (as you can see from the title) focuses on the last category. That doesn’t mean it’s the only category.
And by the way, the different categories of parricides have a different history and especially different behavior and affect after the murders.
Sure, and if your arm or leg is cut while in the back woods, and you can’t get to a doctor, and the wound goes rancid… just cut it off. Sadly, that is more likely to happen than parents believing their child, even if they already absolutely know it, will hurt them.
Until a child, say, attempts and fails to kill his parents, they would not believe it. And oddly, the more so the more sure the parents are that such a thing is a real risk. Is it something to do with the psychopathy of the child, the influence that develops? Or is it the parents feeling they have failed, so, consciously or slightly not, feeling that they deserve whatever they get?
You can try to warn them. It just won’t help. It’s why I don’t watch certain types of horror shows… too prevalent in society (if, thankfully, so far, small portions of it).
The Menendez … peculiar that, two psychos in the same brood.
Here, a clinical pathologist who didn’t see it coming.
There seem to be no limits to pathology.
G6loq:
It’s possible they were both psychopaths, but it is not necessary. With murderous pairs (not necessarily brothers, but they can be brothers in some cases), what I call “dark duos” (see this), sometimes it’s only one who is an actual psychopath, with the other someone with other problems who falls under the psychopath’s considerable sway. For example, with the Menendez brothers, older brother Lyle seems the more clearly psychopathic, with younger brother Eric somewhat less so, showing a tiny bit of something akin to emotions, and confessing to a therapist (the therapist was pretty wacky, too, but that’s a side issue). With the Dingmans, it is generally conceded that the serious psychopath was older brother Robert (then 17) and younger brother Jeffrey (then 14) was somewhat under his sway.
It’s a complex topic when there are two. Sometimes it only takes one to be the true psychopath, but that hardly matters to the murdered parents.
Doom:
In fact, in the Porco case where the mother survived but was horribly disfigured, and had said initially that her son did it (by a head nod when she was near death and about to go into surgery), she recanted and defended her son, professing his innocence. She apparently has not wavered in that position until this day.
In a way, it is understandable. Parental love is very very strong. The ability to accept that a child is a psychopath capable of such actions would be unusual.
Peter Lanza, father of mass murderer (and matricide perpetrator) Adam Lanza, is one of the ones who has reached that very difficult conclusion about his son:
In that same interview, Peter Lanza said he doesn’t believe his son would have hesitated to kill him, too, if he’d been around. I didn’t see any evidence, however, that Adam Lanza had ever embezzled or stolen or otherwise fit the profile of the murderers I discuss in this post. Although I do believe Lanza was a psychopath, he didn’t fit that particular mold.
Abortion of another kind, but for the same causes: wealth, pleasure, and leisure. The child’s psychopathy was either induced or sympathetic with our liberal culture and State-established pro-choice doctrine (i.e. selective principles).
That said, while a moral society may not prevent depredation, it would function as inertia to limit its progress.
n.n.:
These cases are about something more internal. Psychopaths have always existed; I don’t think there’s any indication they are on the rise. What differs is the way different societies deal with them.
Oh, but… I watched the vid. I have changed my mind on something. I don’t believe he was a psychopath, merely greedy. He found loopholes, loopholes that made doing the hard work of life difficult. As such, he was failing in real life. He was addicted to easy, ill-gotten, money. Now, some will debate whether that is psychopathy. Does an act that is so horrible make the diagnosis? I don’t think so. I think he very much chose, just poorly. I don’t think he had a damned thing wrong with him, he chose… everything. I don’t abide the excuses offered, even if they aren’t seen as, or offered as, a defense.
Was Pol Pot a psychopath? Manson? Genghis Khan? Most so-called psychopaths truly aren’t. Dahmer? Maybe. A few other rare cases. Although not even all of them were, even if they acted the part. Murderously pouting for not getting what they want, when they want it, but not necessarily mentally ill. I just have my doubts on this guy being anything other than a man who started going wrong and simply didn’t see another way out so went bad full bore.
There are few criminals, or people who simply do wrong, who… if they really think they can squeeze out of it by killing a few people, won’t. It doesn’t even matter who they have to kill. Only a few where born not knowing or caring about the difference between right and wrong. All I’m saying.
Yeah… the mother creeped me out. I think she knows but cannot find it in her heart to let her mind tell her what she saw with her own eyes. Not sure if she even consciously registers it all. If your child is a monster, than… what are you as the parent? It’s an involved thing. My mothers, I have three, all… have their own fears. Thankfully, more on an esoteric, theoretic, political, perhaps theological level. As liberals, and women, they see me as the second coming of Darth Vader. A love~hate thing, if potent, though too.
Oh, as to psychopathy on the rise? Not a recent thing, but certainly since they started pushing psychotropics. That seems to have been the beginning of a huge increase in incidents. Though it also coincides with the cultural revolution of the late 50’s and 60’s onward. I think n.n. might be onto something, if I had considered, at times, more one, or the other, rather than both… as n.n.’s comments sort of finally lead me to choose now.
Funny how long peanut butter can sit beside chocolate before someone decides to put them together. :p
Doom:
I’ve researched that psychotropic drug and violence connection, and it doesn’t hold up statistically. Too long and complex to go into in depth here, but the gist of it is that people with mental problems are often given psychotropic drugs, and they are the same people who are more likely to be violent (either towards themselves—suicide—or towards others). In other words, there’s a correlation but no evidence of causation. Plus, a lot of early reports on different murderers and mass murderers say the perp is taking psychotropic drugs when in fact he/she is not. Plus, you’re confusing violent criminals with psychopathy—the two are not the same, although there are certainly psychopaths who are crminals; there are also psychopaths who are not criminals, and criminals who are not psychopaths.
Psychopaths and sociopaths only obey certain kinds of rules and authorities.
And if society does not condition into them some kind of control mechanism, like obedience and loyalty to parents, they tend to go off on their own. And if they never grow an internal control mechanism, they tend to self destruct in several fashions.
Doom:
Psychopaths aren’t diagnosed merely by murderous deed. There is a continuum, a group of characteristics they share. Some have to do not with their deeds, but with their affect or lack thereof (or their pretense of affect). There are other behaviors as well that mark them, such as their relatively light-hearted demeanor in the months after their murders. They just don’t act like normal people, and although they sometimes try to, their behavior is “off” in a spectrum of particular ways.
Actually, Dahmer was most likely not a psychopath, although he had multiple other severe personality problems.
One more thing: being a psychopath does NOT absolve someone of full criminal responsibility for his/her crimes. And of course psychopaths make choices; they are not automatons. Many psychopaths never commit a crime; they exploit people in other ways. Criminal psychopaths choose their acts, but psychopathology is one of the main reasons helping to motivate and make possible those choices.
Plus, a lot of early reports on different murderers and mass murderers say the perp is taking psychotropic drugs when in fact he/she is not.
The people society fails to control almost become like feral children. They will be reckless and do things that in the long term doesn’t benefit them, because in the short term they hate anything controlling them as they instinctively judge that as dying or being put into danger. Sort of like a feral cat when you try to hold them. They resist, even though technically a human could take revenge and just kill that cat via poison, bombs, guns, or dynamite traps. The cat either doesn’t understand this, is controlled by fear, or doesn’t want to understand it. The cat, since it doesn’t trust you, will do what the instincts demand and rebel.
In this sense, Lanza may have wanted to get off his meds, so by rebelling against society, he may think society will take revenge, so he might as well kill all of society, including his family, in the process. In other cultures like Japan, this impulse is controlled via conditioning, so that the person kills only themselves. As loyalty to family is pretty high on the list, far higher than loyalty to strangers or the government.
In Palestine, the uncontrollable killers are steered towards Jews and women. The rules are made so obvious that even reckless and out of control sociopaths that have impulse control issues and can’t differentiate between social rules and personal rules, even they can figure out what the optimum decision is.
To a normal socialized person, breaking a few rules here and there like not taking your medicine, wouldn’t make you think society was going to extinguish you for that. To a normal person that is.
To people who tend to go to extreme routes, taking one step of rebellion might as well be the same as rebelling against the entire world and making it their enemy.
I don’t want to ever anger them and just want to keep them far away from me. I don’t want to trip their trigger.
Most of those kinds like to prey on weaklings. They avoid those stronger and more ruthless than themselves.
A normal person likes to avoid danger, that is considered wisdom, yes. But that’s why Leftlings and child rapists exist. They target those who are weak and who society expects to merely defend themselves without aid.
Ymarsakar;
Adam Lanza was not on meds. That he was on meds was an early report that was in error.
See this and this.
Do not rely on early reports—they are very often wrong.
From “The psycho gene,” a 2010 article in EMBO Reports, a scientific journal on research in molecular biology:
Fascinating, and scary.
Adam Lanza was not on meds. That he was on meds was an early report that was in error.
That wasn’t the story I heard. I heard that he was proscribed medication years ago but that due to his resistance, he doesn’t take them or the orders were rescinded.
they make Ayers happy…
Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that’s where it’s really at.
Bill Ayers
They can also be used to identify psychopathy in children
They can also be used to induce psychopathy by generating the traits they claim to only be looking for.
Such as regressive memory hypnosis sessions looking for memories or questioning children until they report child abuse.
http://ablechild.org/2014/03/11/new-information-about-adam-lanzas-mental-health-treatment-reveals-multiple-drugs/
Remember that, until 2007, Lanza’s primary psychiatrist was Dr. Paul Fox who, in 2012, accused of having sexual relations with his patients, surrendered his license to practice medicine in New York and Connecticut, destroyed his records and moved to New Zealand.
Now Solomon is reporting that Dr. Fox had prescribed the antidepressant, Lexapro, and reportedly was working with the Yale Child Study Center’s Kathleen Koenig on Adam’s case. Nancy Lanza apparently was very concerned about what appeared to be an adverse reaction to the mind-altering Lexapro and wrote copious notes about Adam’s behavior while on Lexapro. More importantly, Solomon is reporting, apparently based on information gleaned from his extensive interviews with Peter Lanza, that Adam never took psychotropics again.
This important information does not jibe with the information Yale’s Kathleen Koenig provided to investigators and made public in the State’s Police Report of the shooting incident. Most importantly, the public only now, 15-months after the fact, is being made aware of a second psychiatric drug prescribed to Lanza and a second adverse reaction.
Five days after the shooting incident, investigators interviewed Kathleen Koenig. According to the police summary of Koenig’s interview the following was revealed.
“Koenig prescribed medication: Celexa — antidepressant/anti-anxiety.”
“Koenig recommended Adam Lanza participate in follow-up visits.”
“Koenig described Nancy Lanza’s response to her recommendations as “non-compliant.”
“Specifically, immediately after prescribing a small dose of Celexa to Adam Lanza, Koenig received a phone call from Nancy Lanza which reported her son was “unable to raise his arm.” Nancy Lanza was reporting her son was attributing this symptom to the medication. Nancy Lanza stated due to her son’s symptoms, he would be discontinuing use of the medication. Koenig attempted to convince Nancy Lanza that the medication was not causing any purported symptoms which Adam Lanza might be experiencing. However, Nancy Lanza was not receptive to Koenig’s reasoning. Nancy Lanza missed at least one scheduled appointment (unknown date) and failed to schedule subsequent appointments for Adam Lanza. Koenig did contact Dr. Paul Fox and agreed that his behavioral-based therapy would remain the primary course of treatment for Adam Lanza. She stated that Adam Lanza never returned for follow-up visits.”
The presence of any medication, voluntary or involuntary, is proof of social conditioning and the potential reactions to it by people who only obey Authority because of certain rules or fears.
In this case, the “adverse reaction” is enough to qualify as a threat to life and limb of the sociopath, and if any family or social authority is involved in perpetuating this, trust breaks down and vengeance becomes certified in order to survive. At least, from a paranoid perspective, it makes sense. To normals, it does not make sense.
www dailymail.co.uk /news/article-2324336/Adam-Lanza-Sandy-Hook-gunman-drugs-alcohol-carried-Decembers-massacre.html
Being prescribed drugs and not finding the drugs in the system, is its own positive indicator of what I’m talking about. That the violence is related to rebellion against authority and the drugs are involved.
Further reply is in moderation folder probably.
Ymarsakar:
Did you read this link? It was apparently Lanza’s mother who took him off any drugs, and he only was on a small dose for a very short time, many many years before the killings. It is highly unlikely medication played any part at all, and it doesn’t sound like he was the one who refused it when it had been recommended. He didn’t have much treatment in later years, as he got older, so it doesn’t seem that he was refusing medication; he (and perhaps his mother) was refusing treatment for him in general:
According to the report, that occurred 2007 or earlier, perhaps 2006, when Lanza was 14. The murders occurred in December of 2012. Lanza does not seem to have been to a therapist since he was 15.
By the way, I’m not saying that medication and/or therapy would necessarily have helped him. It might have, or might not have.
Ymarsakar:
I found it in the spam folder and now it appears here.
I also had already included that stuff about Koenig and Lanza’s mother (see my comment above this one).
I have no idea what you mean when you write, “The presence of any medication, voluntary or involuntary, is proof of social conditioning and the potential reactions to it by people who only obey Authority because of certain rules or fears.” I could not disagree more. You’re saying that anyone who takes medication is obedient to authority? Some people have illnesses for which they decide to take prescribed medication. They are perfectly free to take it or not take it. It is their decision. They are following advice from physicians. In some cases, the physicians are even complying with the patient’s request for medication.
I am definitely sleeping with one eye open tonight.
Ymarsakar:
One more thing—there were neither drugs nor alcohol in Lanza’s system when he committed his crimes. Anything that said otherwise is in error.
See this.
As I said before, I have found as I follow these stories that inaccurate reporting is almost the norm. Initial reports are continually revised over time, as the actual evidence comes out.
It was apparently Lanza’s mother who took him off any drugs
Did Lanza approve? If he wanted off and trusted his mother, and then got another hit sometime else, that might create paranoid beliefs. Eventually leading to violence if he can’t deal with it. Breivik stories probably didn’t help.
I could not disagree more. You’re saying that anyone who takes medication is obedient to authority?
Social authority. They take drugs not for their own personal benefit, but to fit into society and its decrees. This is part of the ADHD drugs and anti male trends going around as well. I’m addressing the Lanza issues, which you raised concerning drugs and their impact or lack there of. Lack of presence of drugs by time of death doesn’t mean the drugs didn’t impact developmental cycles when he was growing up.
I knew one of the witnesses in the Menendez case. He was absolutely terrified of them. He wouldn’t talk to the cops in the police station, convince that the brothers could have it watched. We arranged for him and the detectives to meet in our office to get his statement.
Yamarsakar:
If you’re saying that psychopaths can’t be controlled, that’s not true — put a psychopath into a hospital for the criminally insane and he will learn to behave, because there is immediate punishment — shock, sedation, immobilization, if he doesn’t.
We have an unwritten rule in L.A. — if you draw your weapon on an LAPD or LASD officer, or fail to put it down when ordered to, you will die. Period. The most hardened criminals, the most sadistic psychopaths, the most monstrous gangbangers all know this, and virtually all obey instantly. The only ones who don’t are those who wish to commit suicide by cop or those who are so deranged that they literally do not know where they are or what they are doing.
In other words, if a rule is laid down and immediately and vigorously enforced, even most psychopaths can be taught to follow it. If you notice, the examples neo has discussed are people with lenient, indulgent parents, not those with strict ones.
Richard Saunders:
The Porcos were not lenient or indulgent, nor were the Dingmans (In fact, their son Jeffrey said he murdered them in part because he chafed at their strict rules).
Strict or indulgent does not matter with a psychopath in terms of getting one to obey a parent. A parent is not a mental hospital or a policeman with a gun, giving orders. Strict parents are just as easily murdered by psychopathic children. The only way to escape is to severely limit contact with them, and even then it’s very hard if they are determined to murder.
Néo
And of course psychopaths make choices; they are not automatons.
I came to believe most people are automatons.
Gurdjief/Oupensky were onto something.
Psychopaths then could be considered even more mechanical than your run of the mill, obese, mall prowling automaton …
It takes a lot of sustained difficult work to snap out or the hypnosis state.
Clarityseeker,
I suggest a dog and a .357 close at hand provides a more restful night than sleeping with one eye open. 🙂
See, that’s why I love engaging with you. I just state things. And you just state them back. You don’t get all fluffy when a disagreement occurs. So dang easy. You ought to teach women how to deal with men. Then again… there is distance and you aren’t going through the raging hormones of youth. Still… Charge by admittance, in case a few decide to rage quit. Just a little advice. :p
Some of that I’ll take your word regarding, some… For example, personally, I know that (in spite of the real problem being a heart condition, not depression), anti-depressants caused me to be suicidal. When I quit them, for a year, or finally totally, I stopped being hospitalized. The junk is nasty. I’ve also seen others who finally quit psychotropics clear up. No, perhaps,… lots of things… Maybe quitting the meds meant there was no longer a felt need, which meant improvement. Maybe, somewhere along the use, whatever was wrong was righted. Lots of maybes, but all double-talk psycho-babble. Plus, that doesn’t make sense in the case of someone who didn’t actually have depression, just a bad heart. So, I am sticking with psychotropics being more of a threat (to some individuals).
Albeit, whether more are helped than hurt? We don’t even know that regarding vaccines. Further, academia (medical or bio), medical field itself, .gov, pick a group or org, doesn’t want to look to closely. Too much money is coming in to shake the boat. And it seems to look good enough for photo ops, but if it went black would be a huge problem for many politicians. And as to better or worse people? That will always be a debate of or about any age, era, time, of man. I do think it can be better or worse, I also think things can be papered over and hidden, or exaggerated or expressed in a one-sided manner. For example, Vlad (the Impaler). He was the only thing that saved Europe from muslim conquest. But the people who took muslim gold, his own kin, where the ones who remained to write the history.
Got a problem with sussing out psychopaths by using the “startle reflex” test. The startle reflex is something entirely below any cognitive issue. It’s blinking, flinching at sudden sounds. If you’re in a mostly dark room and there’s a sudden sound, you’ll see a kind of flare for half a second. That’s the pupil widening. It would be interesting to take a known psychopath and try the sudden noise, or blink tests on him.
As to reactions to other things such as decapitated corpses, some people have seen enough not to be bothered. Some have imagined enough, mentally preparing for an eventuality. Some people may be emotiionally and intellectually disgusted without outward show of any kind. And what is the indicator of “reaction”? Two separate issues.
Messing around with diagnoses in the mental health field can lead to a great many false positives. This is especially true among the non-professionals.
Messing around with diagnoses in the mental health field can lead to a great many false positives. This is especially true among the non-professionals.
Psychiatry is a dismal profession. They all need to ‘inhale the strength, exhale the bullshit’ … over and over.
Me, myself and I were put on warfarin for a few years. I was told by my intimates that unpleasant personality changes occurred. I had no idea even though the three of us try be systematically conscious of our inner processes.
The MD would not acknowledge, t’was out of her envelope of knowledge, anecdotal she said … correctly.
Automatons:
This researcher discovered HE is a psychopath while studying the subject.
Anecdotal in a way.
Tumors are worse than warfarin:
Wife Slips Into Madness As Husband Dies of Brain Tumor.
Is there free will as such or are we condemned to vacantly prowl the malls of America, while obese?
I would normally blame the voters.
I am G6loq.
Tumor:
Charles Whitman.
Antidepressants tend to be activating, and everyone going on one should be alert to the possibility that an “on” switch will be flipped and personality changes result. Let someone you trust and who you will believe know in advance and heed their report card of how you seem. You may not have the insight.
Nonetheless, they help many more people than they harm. The debate only occurs because it is a legitimate question how many negative outcomes we should tolerate.
As for the persisting belief that the medications, rather than the person, cause these tragedies, the evidence is lacking. It is formed from hindsight bias, plus any of a dozen other biases people have against medicines per se.
I have had some parent-killers among my patients, but none of the psychopathic variety. All were psychotic.
warfarin is D-Conn, isn’t it? I once totaled up the number of folks I’d known on coumadin who’d had problems. They were all related to bleeds. I think I got to ten. Scary stuff.
Neo, if what you’re saying is that without forcible controls, psychopathy will out, the decline in social controls means we would be seeing more and more psychopathy. And of course, we are!
Richard Saunders:
You keep saying psychopathy has increased, but what is your evidence? Criminal behavior isn’t necessarily done by psychopaths, and in fact violent crimes (except for the very recent surge in Baltimore, etc.) have mostly been going down in recent years anyway.
White-collar crimes have increased, but again, that tells us nothing about the incidence of psychopathy, because by no means are all criminals psychopaths. A psychopath is a very specific type of person with a specific way of looking at the world (and him/herself), but the incidence of psychopathy is extremely hard to measure, in part because of the deception psychopaths practice. Research on incidence is simply not reliable and/or valid, and we don’t know if it’s increasing, decreasing, or staying the same.
Are YOU a Psychopath?
This is a story about a girl.
While at the funeral of her own mother, she met a guy whom she did not know. She thought this guy was amazing, so much the dream guy that she was searching for that she fell in love with him immediately.
However, she never asked for his name or number and afterward could not find anyone who knew who he was.
A few days later the girl killed her own sister.
Question: Why did she kill her sister?
First, find your own answer to this question.
<a href="http://www.naute.com/puzzles/puzzle22.php" title=""The answer.
Nothings beats siblings’ rivalry.
The flaw is in double, triple thinking. Rabid dogs once identified must be put down.
If you’re saying that psychopaths can’t be controlled, that’s not true
They don’t want to be controlled, concerning their motivations for violence. They use it to get what they want, but what they want isn’t what normal people want.
With enough power, anyone can be controlled, perhaps even the power of the sun can be controlled.
and in fact violent crimes (except for the very recent surge in Baltimore, etc.) have mostly been going down in recent years anyway.
Much of the federal and state information is contaminated, when Demoncrats are involved.
The Democrat mayors and governors order the police to cook the books when it comes to reporting violence or crime, to make their rulerships look better.
Of course, the crime may still be going down (because armed citizens kill criminals that would kill more in the future), but much of the stats are artificial and corrupt.