To think the majority of those convicted of serious violent offences are mentally ill?

[AgentZigzag]

I've always been of the opinion that the majority of people who commit the most serious violent crimes are suffering from mental illness in some form or other.

This shouldn't be taken as a connection between mental illness and violence as I also think that most people with a mental illness don't commit crime and aren't violent, but rather that most people who have committed a serious crime are mentally ill.

Just taking Peter Sutcliffe as an example, how can it possibly be argued that somebody who has done what he did be anything other than mentally ill? In my mind 'sane' people don't go hitting women round the head with a ball pein hammer.

This is only my opinion, and I'm not posting to cause offence to anyone who has had any experience of violent crime, but I'd be interested to hear what you think?

I see what you are saying, but no I think some are technically of a "sound" mind.

They are just very, very evil.

YABU.

What kind of mental illness are you talking about? What do you think such people could be diagnosed with?

Mental illness is not the explanation for all things evil in the world.

sometimes i have found myself wondering the same thing but i have to be honest and say i don't think they all are. i think some of them may be very ill, some not so ill but i do think there are those that truly just horrible people and have nothing more than their own sense of superiority to blame for they things they do.

But couldn't being 'evil' in a burst of extreme violence be classed as a mental illness emmy?

Most people when they feel a build up of anger manage to vent it in a way that doesn't hurt anyone, let alone kill them.

If it's a sound mind, doesnt that mind need medical/psychiatric treatment?

Well I would say it's less mental illness and more that they have a personality disorder.

Some people are just plain nasty.

I agree bing, but if a mind is so different to the expected 'norm' in a society, so much so that it harms other people and can even take their lives, could that be an explantation for their behaviour.

As I said, I'm in no way suggesting there is a connection between mental illness and crime or violence. Not at all.

I think Peter Sutcliffe was thought to have some schizophrenic tendencies for example.

No, an outburst of extreme violence is not classified as mental illness.

Command hallucinations telling them to murder someone - yes, that could be mental illness.

Some kind of extreme disassociation - yes, again that could be mental illness.

Seeking out someone to murder because you like the power and want to enjoy them suffer? Certainly abbhorent and punishable, but not mental illness.

it is all just words, whether we consider them possessed, bewitched, evil, ill, we basically just need to stop them hurting people.

I understand that you are not saying that people who have mental illness are violent or criminal.

I am arguing that those who are violent and criminal are not always mentally ill.

I agree that what I'd call a person of "sound" mind wouldn't do these things, but then that is personal opinion not medical.

I hate to say but I don't think everyone who commits crimes is mentally ill, even in a temporary manner, I just think there are some really, very nasty people out there. There is no explanation or sickness, they are just nasty, evil people.

There's lots of research out there to disprove this theory.

Large et al published a study in the British Journal of Psychiatry in 2008, looking at homicide statistics from 1946-2004, in England & Wales. They found that homicides due to mental disorder declined while overall homicide rate increased.

An individual is over 20 times more likely to be killed by someone without mental illness than by someone with mental illness.

Peter Sutcliffe, btw, was found sane at the time of his trial, but was later diagnosed as having schizophrenia (onset of symptoms after incarceration)

But the classification of what has caused them to commit offences cerealoffender would shape how they'd be treated afterwards, if they're ill, can they be treated? If they're evil there's no hope of rehabilitiation. If they're bewitched...shit, I don't know

So to me it's not just words.

you are erroneously equating reprehensible acts with mental illness

Sutcliffe is detained broadmor under MHA, and has been subject to rigorous Ax,has ward round,is subject to strict supervision.all who have assessed him agree he has a mental illness.his subjective account of why he perpetrated those is that he heard voices compelling him to act (command hallucinations) and experienced paranoia and delusions

Huntley tried to fake mental illness.was assessed at rampton on S2 mha returned to prison.not mentally ill.at all

as hard as it is to comprehend,the human condition can be tortured and undertake vile violent acts, and not necessarily as result of mental illness

i dislike this assumption anything violent or vile= mental illness.that in itself is stigmatising.and plain wrong

YABU, just because someone thinks in a way you cannot understand or identify with it does not follow that they are mentally ill. There is a wide varition in the minds of people - everyday people, it is a sliding scale thing from Evil to Angelic and every single permeatation in between and combinations of those too!

Mental Illness is a totally different thing and whilst it can be that somone who is "evil" is also mentally ill it is not true to say that someone who is evil is mentally ill.

Infact the weird link between mental illness and evil behaviour is what makes it so hard for sufferers to live as normal a life as possible. It is responsible for the stigma that is attached to any mental illness these days and above all it is a cop out IMHO!

If you say people who do bad things are ill then you are, effectivly, saying it is not really their fault it is their "condition". Some people do bad things, not because they are ill but because they are bad. Simples!

i remember my mum telling me of a man who was brought to her hospital after an assault.

he had an epileptic fit whilst walking through a park one evening. he was found by group of men who gang raped him, beat him, took his wallet and put a brush shaft in his anus doing irreparable damage to his internal organs which resulted in his death several hours later.

no-one on this earth could convince me that each and every member of that group of men suffered from a mental illness which explained their actions. what they did, they did because they are nasty evil people and the oportunity to have a bit of sick fun presented itself to them.

I totally agree that no assumptions should be made that mentally ill people are more prone to be violent or to commit criminal offences SM.

I think there is often mental illness, especially in cases where someone snaps and goes on a shooting spree or similar.

If a child is brought up without love and knowing nothing but violence and abuse, they are likely to grow up to be the same. That could be considered mental illness.

Being a psychopath and having no feelings or empathy could be classed as a mental illness.

I find it hard to believe that someone can be truly evil and perfectly sane.

see this on mn a lot.vile act described

some one pops up "maybe he/she mentally ill". as if that is only plausible reason

no it isnt the only plausible reason

Mad of evil they should be locked away and forgotten about

Lynli, being bought up without love is not a mental illness!! Being affected mentally by situations beyond your control is not the same thing as a mentl illness!

I am pretty sure that being a psycopath is a mental illness though - in law and in medicene...?

of course someone can be "sane" and perpetrate vile acts.human base emotions eg rage,jeaulosy,greed all impact upon behaviour.
two distinct categories are being confused here. Absence of mental illness, and diagnosis mental illness to expalin criminality

I have wondered similar things in the past. How can someone like peter Sutcliffe do what he did, and be "normal and sane"? Yet he lived an ordinary life and had a wife and family who cared about him.

Totally agree SM.

Just helps perpetuate stigma surrounding mental illness.

I teach medical students on Psych rotations; one of my sessions is on attitudes towards mental illness (which is why the information above is so fresh in my head; term starts next week.)

This one always irritates me, the assumption that bad behaviour cannot be acted out by somone of sound mind.

I agree with SM, the old "maybe they were MI" being trotted out is one of the most annoying things ever - yes it is possible that the person has some MI but it is also possible they have diabeties or maybe they have an overly large second toe... MI does not and evil person make, it is not an excuse!

It's facile to say I can't understand how someone could do such a terrible thing so they must be insane.