Aubergina
@DandyMandy What's unbelievable is that a person would randomly choose to be a rapist or serial killer without having experienced trauma and/or psychological disorder
The only alternative is to believe that some people are evil in the absence of psychopathology. I struggle with that. Maybe it would be easier to believe if I was religious and could blame the devil?
I have have worked with some children who had severe behaviour disorders due to brain damage. There is no childhood diagnosis of Psychopath so their behaviour cannot be described as such. They were children who were loved and cared for, whose parents were worried sick about what would become of them as they got older.
They were children who could not be left unsupervised with other children because of the harm they would do to them. Children who were not rampaging, out of control monsters but often quiet and calm - and completely lacking in empathy.
One child, aged 7, was found calmly strangling another child because he found it interesting to watch another child struggle and cry. A girl, aged 10, picked up a high-heeled shoe that a teacher had absent-mindedly kicked off under the table, took it into a room where a sick child was sleeping and drove it into her eye.
Most of the time those children were sociable and their behaviour unremarkable but they were also unpredictable and extremely dangerous. The 7 yr old was in a special school and also had mild-moderate learning difficulties. The 10 yr old was actually in a secure unit when she blinded another child.
I have met other dangerous children who were fine until they suffered head injuries in childhood or who had developed brain tumours.
I have also met extremely dangerous adults who were fine until they suffered brain injuries or strokes.
There is a basic rule in medical diagnosis, “First exclude the organic.” That is, look for a physical problem before considering a psychiatric issue or environmental cause.
Whatever the reason for abusive behaviour, safeguarding has to be a priority. The case of the teenage schoolboy in Scotland who sexually assaulted a young girl (aged 6 ?) is a good example. The judge was excessively lenient because he had been accepted to study dentistry and he didn’t want his career to be ruined and also excused his behaviour as “naive experimentation” due to autism.
Absolutely horrifying and entirely inappropriate, IMHO. The judge showed no empathy for the victim and facilitated the abuser acquiring a position of trust that would give him access to other potential victims.
In that case, Autism was cited at the reason for the abusive behaviour by a judge whose own conduct was later revealed to have been very peculiar.
There are neurological conditions that can result in disinhibited sexual behaviour and that can include abusing others.
None of these reasons make it any less unpleasant, traumatising or dangerous for those who are abused. However, in some cases I think it would be hard not to feel some compassion for the abuser, which does not necessitate condoning their behaviour in the slightest.
Once upon a time, some of these people would have been incarcerated in long-stay psychiatric institutions. We became more tolerant as a society, deciding that “Care in the Community” was a more humane option.
Most people who would previously have been locked away out of sight and out of mind do not present any risk to anyone else at all.
There are some whoever who will instead end up in the criminal justice system. Behaviour that would have been tolerated in a psychiatric institution, such as compulsively masturbating in public, is not acceptable in “the Community” and causes distress to members of the public. Others might be violent and spend time in and out of prison. Not all will be capable of controlling their behaviour.
When I was 7 I was sexually assaulted by an adult male relative who had become sexually disinhibited after suffering a head injury. It was terrifying at the time but I cannot say it had any lasting impact except to make sure I was never left alone with him again. Similarly, when I was about 10 and a friend’s grandfather who was in the early stages of dementia grappled with me and attempted to sexually assault me.
It was much more frightening, even though the incident was less extreme, when around the same time a local headmaster grabbed me, sat me on his lap and pawed at my body. It was worse because even as a child I knew that this attack was calculated, determined and it was harder to escape.
I can forgive the first two assaults because those men were not in their right minds. I can also forgive all the male patients who wanked at me, tried to grope me, who made revolting, lascivious remarks. None of them were in their right minds and would have been horrified by their behaviour if they had suddenly recovered their senses.
That does not mean, however, that children and women should not be protected from men like these.
I could go on about abusive men suffering severe PTSD, particularly due to time in the services in armed conflict, but I won’t. Just to say to the PP who claimed that war veterans do not go on to abuse - you are wrong, some do and can be extremely violent. I have personal experience and have also discussed this with the wives, children or parents of veterans of WW1, WW2 and Vietnam.