“What do you think I should have done in that situation”. A friend of mine just barged in on me with this question.
“What situation” I queried.
He went on describing the situation throwing himself on the chair in front of me and looking exhausted.
He had two close friends in school. One dropped out of the primary school when he lost his mother. The rumour went around that his dad was the cause of his mother’s death. Many believed it when his dad hastily remarried before the family even got time to bereave. The other two of the trio went into high school. Still their friendship continued. After completing high school my friend joined a catholic seminary to become a priest (that’s where we became friends). However, the other two continued to be friends, while the third missed them.
In the second year of his stay in the seminary the rule of “great silence” of the morning hours went off the roof when he screamed at the top of his voice while a piece of newspaper shivered in his hands. The newspaper brought the story of a teenage murder, matter-of-factly and lifeless – a teenager stabbed his close friend to death while trying to figure out who of them the girl next door loved. My friend learned from the newspaper that one of his closest friends was killed by the other closest friend.
An interval of twenty years. My friend has been a priest for more than 5 years now. The situation that put him under utter confusion occurred when he was holidaying He went out to meet his old friends. While chatting with his friends someone walked towards him with a broad smile. My friend did not need much time to recognize him though meeting after twenty years. This had been a face that pleased him and a smile that lifted his heart up when he was in school. But that was not the case this time. The face and the smile did not please anyone anymore because the guy was a killer. “Do you recognize him” one asked. “Have nothing to do with him, because he killed one of your folk, a Christian” the other brought in religion. “Priests don’t usually associate with murders, do they?” a third one was curious while the killer just passed by not even acknowledged by anyone. His face was not smiling anymore.
“What do you think I should have done in that situation” he asked me again.
I was not too sure, honestly.
Gene is the problem?
The behavioral sciences still debate: “Is a criminal born or made”. There has been an increasing interest in the neurobiological basis of aggression and crime over the past decade, boosted by methodological advances in neuro-imaging and molecular genetics (Sterzer,2010). Genetics is the most argued point of criminology today. Some believe that genetics cause people to commit crimes (Godwin, 2001). Prominent researchers believed that genes were fully responsible for criminal activity and that criminals could be identified by their physiological features. People research to find out that whether certain chromosome combination could automatically make you a criminal or not a criminal. If this is true you could see even before your child was born if it would be a criminal in society. (Dressing, Sartorius & Meyer-Lindenberg, 2008). This makes us believe that criminals have a psychological problem. Although this may seem like a solution to some, it is creating a dilemma for our society. Once we label these individuals as criminals it creates a stigma for those who may suffer from psychological problems who don’t often become criminals. Certain psychological problems have been shown to be heritable and if given the right circumstances, individuals with those genes could find themselves engaging in criminal activity. Therefore, should society look towards adapting preventive measures in the case of people with psychological issues so that they don’t become criminals? This might amount to concluding every crime committed points towards the failure of the criminal’s community or society.
Environment too
There was evidence to support the idea that the environment also played an important role in crime. Early family studies were conducted that showed a predisposition for criminal behavior as a result of inherited characteristics, but that an individual's characteristics and personality could still be modified by the environment (Joseph, 2001). The family environment is critical to the upbringing of a child and if problems exist then the child is most likely to suffer the consequences. Studies have shown that the problems associated with a child who is diagnosed with ADHD can influence antisocial or criminal behaviour (Kostelnik et al. 2002). Even the hyperactivity of children is attributed to family environment (Cutler & Marcus, 2010). Research conducted on the relationship between family environment and child behavior characterizes a child's well being with a positive and caring parent-child relationship, a stimulating home environment, and consistent disciplinary techniques. Families with poor communication and weak family bonds have been shown to have a correlation with children's development of aggressive/criminal behavior. Therefore it seems obvious to conclude that those families who are less financially sound, perhaps have more children, and who are unable to consistently follow-up their children will have a greater likelihood of promoting an environment that will influence antisocial or delinquent behaviour (Michalski & Kerr, 2004).
Another indicator of future antisocial or criminal behavior is that of abuse or neglect in childhood. A statistic shows that children are at a fifty percent greater risk of engaging in criminal acts, if they were neglected or abused (Holmes et al., 2001). This has been one of the most popular arguments as to why children develop antisocial or delinquent behaviors. This raises the question of whether the environment can also influence individuals to act in a criminal manner.
Our biases
Often our attitude towards people engaging in criminal activities or punished for the same are often a part of the cultural baggage passed down over the years, and are fraught with the frailties of human thinking. Conclusions are predominantly based on what we think about crimes, criminals and what has been written in the past. However our biases do not help change the situation. There is a great need to try and identify those individuals, especially children, who may become susceptible to certain disorders or personality traits that can lead into antisocial, delinquent, or criminal behavior. Society should not try to imitate the era of controlled breeding, but rather focus on the treatment and rehabilitation of those individuals in need. Certain educational, environment enrichment programs have been shown to have a lasting effect on children if given by a certain age (Kostelnik et al. 2002). If more of these programs could be developed, society could help prevent the future antisocial or criminal behavior of children.
Conclusion
Criminal behavior has always been a focus for psychologists due to the age old debate between nature and nurture: Is it the responsibility of an individual's genetic makeup that makes them a criminal or is it the environment in which they are raised that determines their outcome? To fully understand the nature of how genes and the environment influence criminal behavior, one must first know how criminal behavior is defined. Law in our society is defined by social and legal institutions, not in biology (Morley & Hall, 2003). Therefore determining what constitutes criminal behavior can envelope a wide variety of activities and for that reason, researchers tend to focus on the wider context of antisocial behavior. Research conducted regarding this debate has resulted in a conclusion that both genes and environment do play a role in the criminality of an individual. Furthermore, the research has stated that it is more often an interaction between genes and the environment that predicts criminal behavior. Having a genetic predisposition for criminal behavior does not determine the actions of an individual, but if they are exposed to the right environment, then their chances are greater for engaging in criminal or anti-social behavior.
Reference
1. Cutler, J.L & Marcus, E.R. (2010). Psychiatry (2nd Ed.). London: Oxford University Press.
2. Dressing H., Sartorius A., Meyer-Lindenberg. A. (2008). Implications of MRI and genetics for the law and the routine practice of forensic psychiatry. Neurocase 14:7–14.
3. Godwin, G.M. (Ed.). (2001). Criminal Psychology and Forensic Technology: A Collaborative Approach to Effective Profiling. New York: CRC Press.
5. Joseph, J. (2001). Is crime in the genes? A critical review of twin and adoption studies of criminality and antisocial behavior. The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 22, 179-218.
6. Kostelnik, et al. (2002). Guiding Children’s Social Development: Theory and Practice (4th Ed). Australia: Thomson Learning.
7. Michalski, J & Kerr, D. (2004). Family Structures and Children’s Behavioral problems: A Latent Growth Curve Analysis. London: Population Studies Centre.
8. Morley, K.I &. Hall, W.D. (2003). Is There a Genetic Susceptibility to Engage in Criminal Acts? Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology
9. Sterzer, P. (2010). Born to Be Criminal? What to Make of Early Biological Risk Factors for Criminal Behavior. American Journal of Psychiatry 167:1-3,
________________
* The author is a Research Scholar in Psychology at Christ University, Bangalore
No comments:
Post a Comment