Neurosis vs. Psychosis

            Neurosis –

historically, Freud, ex. Conversion disorders, hysteria stuff, fear of a white rat is your conscious acknowledgement of a neurotic processing really it is something else your not ready to acknowledge, ex. At 5 yours brother scared you with a stuffed white teddy bear

                       

Today we’d consider neurosis, predominately anything that includes maladaptive coping and not major mental illness, like schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.  Ex. somatoform disorders, factious disorders, sexual and gender identity disorders, eating disorders, adjustment disorders, substance abuse disorders, and others maladaptive coping

           

            Major mental illness, think neurochemical, biological problems, like dementia, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, cognitive disorders, head traumas

           

            Psychosis is by DSM definition: experiencing hallucinations, delusions, grossly disorganized behavior or catatonia, disorganized speech (thought process).  The courts use a medical model of insanity and I can get into that later. 

           

Hallucinations: Auditory, visual, gustatory, somatic, tactile, *visual are rare

           

Delusions: bizarre, jealousy, erotomania, grandiose, of reference, persecution, somatic, thought broadcasting, thought insertion

           

Speech/Thought process: tangential, circumstantial, word salad, echolalia, clang association, neologisms, loose associations

           

Disorders associated with psychosis, substance abuse, mood, bipolar, schizophrenia, schizoaffective, borderline,

 

Legal insanity rules

The M’Naghten rule of insanity (English law), M’Naghten killed the private secretary of Prime Minister Robert Peel and he was acquitted.  In response the house of lords made a rule that stated “to establish a defense on the grounds of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was laboring under such a defect of reasons, form disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or, if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong” 10 Cl. & F. 200, 8 Eng. Rep. 718 (H.L. 1843).  This was in 1843 and both England and US adapted the rule. 

Then the US implemented the Irresistible Impulse rule because people didn’t like the M’Naghten rule.  The Irresistible rule says, in sum, due to a mental disease the person had no free will to choose between right and wrong and that without the mental disease the incident would not have occurred. 

Then in 1954, in Durham v. US introduced the product test, which stated “ an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or defect.” 214 F.2d 862 (D.C. Cir. 1954).  This became a problem when the St. Elizabeth hospital, that conducted the insanity evals for DC decided to include personality disorders, including sociopathic personality disorder into the ranks of mental disease.  And most criminals fit that standard.

So in MacDonald v. US, DC decided the following instructions to a jury should be given “the jury should be told that a mental disease or defect includes any abnormal condition of the mind that substantially affects mental or emotional processes and substantially impairs behavior controls”. 

 

After this yet another test was used and for the most part adapted in all states that allow the insanity defense ( Idaho, Montana, and Utah don’t allow it).  The American Law Institute (ALI) rule states “ A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either or appreciate the criminality (Wrongfulness) of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law”  The second prang of this rule excluded psychopathetic personality as a mental disease or defect. During the Hinckley trail both the ABA and APA recommended the removal of the volitional prong (control over behavior) but to keep the appreciation prong, that because of the mental disease or defect the person could not appreciate the wrongfulness of the act.  This was essentially adapted by US congress in 1984, 20 states as of 1995 used the ALI test, NH used the product test, and other states use some form of the M’Naghten /cognitive impairment only test. 

            Other issues with mental states is in question:  Automatism Defense, which is if your not conscious during the offense, your not responsible, examples are crimes committed during sleep, crimes committed during a state of unconsciousness induced by a head injury, hypnotic suggestion, shock created by bullet wounds, or metabolic disorders such as hypoglycemia, anoxia, or involuntary ingestion of drugs or alcohol, epilepsy or dissociation.  Most courts limit the automatism defense holding that a person claiming one of the above can’t if the disability was experienced before and reasonable steps could have been taken to prevent the act.  Ex pet mal or grand mal seizures, has an accident, MD notifies the DMV, person drives again and has an accident, are they responsible?  Example of schizophrenic who stops meds?  Dissociation doesn’t work well in the US

            Mens Rea (Diminished capacity) Mens Rhea is describes the various levels of culpability.  Specific intent refers to those crimes that requires some thinking, premeditated, aggravated assaults, assault with intent to rape.  General intent means that the person was conscious or should have been conscious of their physical actions and their consequences, manslaughter, battery, rape.  From this grew the diminished capacity doctrine which allows a defendant to use clinical testimony related to mens rhea without having to assert the insanity defense.  We don’t waste time here because for the most part it is not used in the US.  It was used allot in CA until it was abolished in 1981.  currently diminished capacity plays a role in sentencing more than at trail for guilt or innocence, usually as a character testimony.

            Actus Reus Testimony – the physical act or omission required for conviction of a particular crime and this act or omission is one that the person has physical control over.  This happens in three situations, the first is when the defense wants expert testimony to prove they did not commit an act “ I am not the kind of person who would have raped her”, if the prosecution wants expert testimony that the person did commit the act, “ he is the type of person to rape” or to inform if a crime did occur, “she is evidencing symptoms of rape trauma”.  Proof of character testimony that they are the type to commit or not to commit an act.

            Self-defense, Provocation, Duress, and Entrapment. 

(Melton, Petrila, Poythress, Slobin, 1970)

 

 

301.7 Antisocial Personality Disorder  F60.2

            Pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begin in childhood or early adolescence and continues through adulthood

            Also referred to as sociopathy, psychopathy, or dysocial personality disorder

            Characteristics:            

                                    ~failure to conform to social norms, unlawful

behavior

~deceitfulness, by lying, using aliases or conning

others for profit or pleasure

                                    ~impulsivity or failure to plan ahead

                                    ~irritability and aggressiveness, physical assaults

                                    ~reckless disregard for the safety of others or self

                                    ~consistent irresponsibility, inconsistent work or

failure to honor financial responsibilities

                                    ~lack of remorse, indifferent to or rationalizing what

they have done to others

                        *Must be 18 years of age

                        *Evidence of a conduct disorder with onset before the age

of 15

                        *Behavior does not occur during course of schizophrenia

or manic episode

           

                                                                                                (DSM-IV)

comorbided: Substance abuse, mood disorder, anxiety, paraphilias, malingering (Kenneth Bianchi- hillside strangler tried MPD)

Causes:

Criticisms on APD:

            APD focuses on criminal behavior lacking the two factor structure of the HARE and is indistinguishable from severe or persistent criminalality. 

 

Research says about causes APD

Appears to be heredity

            Children not biological to parent with SPD are still at higher risk than those without

            Higher testosterone levels in other species is associated with aggression, in our prison population of violent offenders – not of high levels in general population

            Low serotonin levels and 5HT association with impulsivity and aggression

            Damage to prefrontal lobes with EEG and PET scans,

            Brain waves are slower than adults and more like children, possibly indicating slow maturatation

 

 

Real evidence is in the history of APD:

            Gluceck’s research on 500 delinquent and non-delinquent in the 40’s found delinquents were more likely to with parents who were alcoholic, criminal, divorced or separated parents, absence of at least one parent, parents were often hostile and rejecting, inconsistent and erratic in discipline, and most used physical punishment. 

Today all the research tells us: 

            the loss of a parental figure is important: Bowlby

            divorce is not as important as initial relationship between the parents

erratic and inappropriate punishment is the worst!- Dutton’s stuff punished but don’t know why, in front of others, ?

            poorly supervised by adults as children

            tend to choose similar friends

            childhood abuse

                                                                                                            (Black, 1999)

 

Delinquency in general: Characteristics of those in system:

            Demographics:

The early initiation

            Males

Educational domain

            Low expectations and little commitment to education

                        Low participation in after school activities

                        Low achievement in early grades

                        Poor verbal ability

            Conduct/ behavior       

            Truancy

                        Acting out

                        Lying

                        Early stealing

            Religious domain

            Low attendance at church

Peer Influence

            Heavily influenced by peers

            Nonconforming

            High risk involvement   

Early and heavy substance abuse

                        Precocious sex

            Psychological factors   

Hyperactivity

            Anxiety

                        Aggressiveness behavior

            Congenital factors

                        Handicapping conditions

            Household composition

                        Inconsistent data

            SES    

Low SES

            Parent role

                        Lack of bonding with parents

                        Abusive

                        Low communication

                        Repressive

            Parental practices of high risk behavior

                        History of criminality

                        Violence

                        Mental illness

                        Alcoholism

            Community neighborhood

                        Urban

                        High crime

                        High mobility

            Community school

                        Repressive environment

                        Tracking ability

                        Ineffective school management

(Dryfoos, 1990)

           

312.    Conduct Disorder F91.8

 

40% of boys and 25% of girls dx with conduct disorder will go on to become antisocial.  (Black, 1999)

           

A repetitive and persistent pattern of behavior where the rights of others are violated or major age-appropriate societal normals or rules are violated

           

Characteristics (3 or more in the last 12 months, and one in the past 6 months)

                        *Aggression to people or animals

                                    ~ bullies, threatens or intimidates

                                    ~ initiates physical fights

                                    ~ has used weapons that can cause serious harm

                                    ~ physically cruel to people or animals

                                    ~ stolen while confronting a victim

                                    ~ forced someone into sexual activity

                        *Destruction of property

                                    ~ deliberately started a fire with intention of causing

harm

                                    ~ deliberately destroyed others’ property (other than

firesetting)

                        *Deceitfulness or theft

                                    ~ has broken into someone’s house, building or car

                                    ~ often leis to obtain goods or favors or avoid

responsibility

                                    ~ has stolen items of nontrivial value without

confronting a victim

                        *Serious violation of rules

                                    ~ breaks curfew beginning before age 13

                                    ~ has run away form home overnight at least 2ce or

1ce for long time

                                    ~ truant form school beginning before the age 13

            *Behaviors causes clinically significant impairment in social, academic, or occupational functioning

            * Under 18 years of age

            *Types:

312. 81 childhood-onset type –onset of at least one criterion prior to age 10

                       

312. 82 adolescent-onset type-absence of any criterion prior to age 10

           

312. 89 Unspecified – onset unknown

 

            Severities

Mild: few if any conduct problems & problems cause only minor harm to others

                        Moderate: number of problems and severity of harm

between the two

                        Severe: many problems or causes considerable harm

           

What improves it?  Robins study indicates that marriage, age, strong family ties, (Gluek) found job stability, (robins (brief jail terms v. none or lengthy)           (Black, 1999)

 

Not all children will grow up to be APS or psychopaths

 

Difference between Conduct disorder kid and psychopaths:

            What Hare labels selfish, callous and remorseless use of others

                        Grandiose sense of self-worth

                        Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom

                        Conning/manipulating

                        Lack of remorse of guilt

                        Shallow affect

                        Callous/lack of empathy

                        Parasitic lifestyle

                        Lack of realistic long-term goals

                        Irresponsibility

                        Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

            When looking into the background of offenders, psychopaths do not have the same dysfunctional home life that other offenders have had

                       

                       

313.81 Oppositional Defiant Disorder F91.3

            A pattern of negativistic, hostile, and defiant behavior lasting at least 6 months, during which 4 or more of the following are present

            Characteristics:

                        ~ often losses temper

                        ~ often argues with adults

                        ~ often actively defies or refuse to comply with adults requests or rules

                        ~ often deliberately annoys others

                        ~ often blames others for mistakes or misbehavior

                        ~ easily annoyed by others

                        ~ is often angry and resentful

                        ~ is often spiteful or vindictive

            *causes impairment in social, academic or occupational functioning

            *behavior does not occur during a psychotic episode or mood disorder

            *doesn’t met the criteria for conduct disorder

 

MacDonald’s Triad

            MacDonald discovered that in his sample the serial killers had three similarities in their background:  During childhood they were firesetters, were cruel to animals, and were bed-wetters.  Bedwetting formally called enuresis and it is the repeated voiding of urine into bed or cloths whether involuntary or intentional, happens twice a week for at least 3 consecutive months or causes impairment in functioning and child is over 5 years of age.  There is nocturnal or diurnal, or both. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hare’s psychopathology

 

Major clinical description of the psychopath from Cleckley’s The Mask of Sanity (1976) has 16 characteristics:

            ~Superficial charm and intelligence

            ~Absence of delusions or other signs of irrational thinking

            ~Absence of nervousness or psychoneurotic manifestations

            ~Unreliability

            ~Untruthfulness or insincerity

            ~Lack of remorse or shame

            ~Inadequate motivated antisocial behavior

            ~Poor judgment and failure to learn form experience

            ~Pathological egocentricity and incapacity for love

            ~General poverty in affective relations

            ~Specific loss of insight; unresponsiveness in general interpersonal relations

            ~Fantastic and uninviting behaviors with drink (and sometimes without)

            ~Suicide rarely carried out

            ~Sex life impersonal, trivial, and poorly integrated

            ~Failure to follow any life plan

(these traits are also found in histrionic, naraccistic, antisocial, and borderline)

 

 

 

Hare would later take this list and test his test construction coming up with two factors, the first being selfish, callous and remorseless use of others.  The second being  labeled chronically unstable and antisocial lifestyle.

 

Chronic

Associated with criminalality but that doesn’t mean all psychopaths are criminals or

that all criminals are psychopaths

 

PCL-R is a 20-item symptom scale

            Glibness/superficial charm

            Grandiose sense of self-worth

            Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom

            Pathological lying

            Conning/manipulating

            Lack of remorse of guilt

            Shallow affect

            Callous/lack of empathy

            Parasitic lifestyle

            Poor behavioral controls

            Promiscuous sexual behavior

            Early behavioral problems

            Lack of realistic long-term goals

            Impulsivity

            Irresponsibility

            Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

            Many short term marital relationships

            Juvenile delinquency

            Revocation of conditional release

            Criminal virility

PCL-SV

            Superficial

            Grandiose

            Deceitful

            Lacks remorse

            Lacks empathy

            Doesn’t’ accept responsibility

            Impulsive

            Poor behavioral controls

            Lacks goals

            Irresponsible

            Adolescent antisocial behavior

            Adult antisocial behavior

 

 

inner speech lacks emotional punch

 

weak capacity for mentally picturing the consequences of their behavior

 

20% of all man and women in prison are psychopaths

 

responsible for 50% of serious crimes

 

recidivism is higher than other offenders

 

313.89 Reactive Attachment Disorder of Infancy or Early childhood

 

            Markedly disturbed and developmentally inappropriate social relatedness in most contexts, beginning before age 5 as evidenced by:

                        A) Persistent failure to initiate or respond in a developmentally appropriate fashion to most social interactions, excessive inhibited, hypervigilant, or highly ambivalent and contradictory responses

                                                OR

                             Diffuse attachments as manifested by indiscriminate socialibility with marked inability to exhibit appropriate selective attachments

 

                        B) no MR or developmental disorder

                        C) Pathogenic case as evidenced by:

            ~Persistent disregard of the child’s basic emotional needs for comfort, stimulation, and affection

            ~Persistent disregard of the child’s basic physical needs

            ~ Repeated changes of primary caregiver that prevent formulation of stable attachments

 

Moral development: Kolhberg, form external to internal controls

 

 

Level One: Pre conventional Reasoning

                No internalization, behavior based on rewards and

punishment

                        Stage 1: Punishment and obedience orientation

                                                Obey because told to and fear punishment

                        Stage 2: Individualism and purpose

Children obey when they want to and when it is in their best interest

Level Two: Conventional Reasoning

                  Abide by internal standards, but they are the standards of

others they are using    

                        Stage 3: Interpersonal norms

                                                Children adapt parents moral standards,

seeking to be good

                        Stage 4: Social system morality (up to age 10 yo)

                                                Children obey based on their understanding of

social order, law, and justice

Level Three: Post conventional Reasoning

                        Morality is internalized and not based on others, sees

moral choices, explores options and decides based on

personal moral code

                       

            Stage 5: Community rights versus individual rights:

                                                Recognizes laws are important but that laws change and should for some values, like liberty, values and laws are relative and may change depending on situations  (age 20 to 22)

                                   

Stage 6: Universal ethical principles

                                                When faced with a conflict between conscious and law, will risk self for consciousness, for right based on a universal human rights

 

References:

            Sarah’s Brain

            High Risk: Children without a Conscious by Magid, K. & McKelvey, C.A.

            Without Conscience by Hare, R.

            Diagnostic & Statistical Manual, IV by American Psychiatric Association