We most likely ARE dealing with sexual sadism because the LISK victims were primarily involved in the sex trade; I guess i'm splitting hairs on this however, as I strongly feel that relevant research indicates only a percentage of SPD involves the sexually sadistic component.
Forensic psychiatrist, Stephen Hucker states that, while the two are related, it is important to make the distinction between the two:
http://www.forensicpsychiatry.ca/paraphilia/sadism.htm
I'm not a psychiatrist or an expert however, so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this point.[/QUOTE]
I have to stay on the subject because it falls in my main area of interest. The whole discussion appears to be part of the ongoing DSM-V struggle in this aspect. The older definitions (for example Hazelwood) basically define all pervasive cruel behavior as sadism while they define sadism in bed as part of the SPD and the same time as paraphilia, so technically the same group of NODs they just pack also Necrophilia in. Which lead to some struggle with the current definition process in DSM-V. To me, with the special focus on SKs, the definition of all permanently repeated cruelty has a little kink, because we have enough extreme cases to prove, that, what is defined as sadistic behavior in the DSM-III and IV definitions is not even primary behavior but just method to gain access to a fetish. Which, between my studies of psychology and my studying of real world serial killers, make me slowly a little bit of a DPD patient. I know the psychological definition, only it doesn't work if used on real life cases. But when talking about real SKs, I tend a little bit more to use, what can be observed in real life:
- Volkert Eckert (A German case): Hair fetish, murder by strangulation, beating to subdue the victim premortem. The whole picture of sadistic behavior was there, when the bodies were found, but when caught, it became clear, it was just his method to the object of his obsession (I will prepare that case for my website next month if I find time). In Eckert's case things got even more interesting, because over time, he developed a secondary obsession with strangulation. The method became over time a part of his sexual behavior, but it was not reason. In fact, it was part of a pattern of necrophilia, as such a paraphilia disorder.
- Jeffrey Dahmer: He obviously raped, killed and ate people (in fact, he ate only some parts of some victims). Since it was a repeating case of rape and killing, everybody jumped on the SPD train in that case (it was long before DSM-III of course). Special mark in that case was, that he in some cases drilled holes in the heads of his victims and filled in drain cleaner or hot water. Clearly sadistic behavior? But then, it came out, he tried to create an always available sex zombie, which was reasoned by a combination of OCD in connection with abandonment issues. The "obvious" sadistic acts were method to reach a goal.
I could bring more, but the problem is clear. The definition of an SPD would work in a generalized form AFTER an SK is caught. But it doesn't cover really cruel behavior, we can for example watch on crime scenes in SK cases. The SPD diagnosis in this statistics from the article you linked, doesn't cover such behavior in cases it is used to reach a goal or gain access to a fetish. In that, I tend to the paraphilia definition, rather than to the definition of SPD as stand alone picture in the DSM (like the author of the second article, you linked).
)
