GUILTY OH - Deborah McVay, 46, murdered, Big Prairie, 2 Jan 2011

[oceanblueeyes]

I agree with you (and so does research, fwiw).

My own personal theory is that it takes a combination of circumstances: genetic, environment and timing. Change or prevent just one of those factors from coming into play and the conscience develops in a normal way.

I don't think there is a single gene for a predisposition to violence but I do think there are genes that affect risk taking, ability to use logic, speed of emotional development, sociability, etc. Some percentage of people inherit a combination of many genes and modifier genes that could make them more prone to violence.

Environment matters, there's no doubt about that. While there are always exceptions, they are exceptions. For example, someone who is easily overwhelmed and needs help with every little thing that happens to them may have been raised by helicopter parents. Not every child of helicopter parents is easily overwhelmed but enough of them are that a trend can be seen.

Timing also matters. There are developmental windows and once that window closes, it is very difficult for the person to attain that particular skill. For an example of a physical developmental window, children who are born with juvenile cataract(s) have a developmental window of 32 weeks (I think, I can't remember for sure) before they lose the ability to see. Even if the cataract(s) are removed after that age, the brain has already used the wiring that would have been used to process optical input from that eye for other purposes. It is known that there are developmental windows for psychological characteristics as well. There is some evidence that trauma is more damaging during some periods of development than at other periods of development.

My theory is that a child born with a genetic predisposition towards risk taking, impulsiveness and low levels of innate cautiousness (among other factors) who are traumatised during certain specific developmental periods are the ones who grow up without a conscience.

So I think the reason why lack of conscience is extremely rare while child abuse is (unfortunately) not equally rare is because very few children are exposed to all the factors that go into lack of conscience.

That is very interesting and does make sense.

Its like a perfect storm where all factors have to come together to form.

Thank you.

 

[pomegranate]

The case was on NG tonight. Just to update, the 10 year old shot his mother with a .22 rifle he got for Christmas. His father and mother are reportedly separated but the boy had a gun rack in his room containing 4 rifles, three .22's and a shotgun. Reportedly given to him by his father.

That is unbelievable to me. He is just 10 years old - a child, in some ways probably still a baby. Not only did he have easy access to guns and ammo, but it seems like the possession and use of weapons was glorified and encouraged. That is unconscionable. And the gun rack was in his room at his mother's house? If so, she was either ok with it or didn't have the courage to stand up to her son and/or his father about the issue. Ugh, it's just a tragedy all the way around. I agree that it was a toxic cocktail of many bad things, not just one thing, that brought that poor boy to where he is today. So many people failed him along the way.

(quote snipped and bolded by me)

 

[dgfred]

That is very interesting and does make sense.

Its like a perfect storm where all factors have to come together to form.

Thank you.

Yep, just like the AZ case you mentioned earlier. 'Perfect Storm' is a good way to put it.

 

[2goldfish]

The same question is asked about school shooters.

The short answer is that an FBI report found that there is a short list of characteristics that are shared by most school shooters... but also by up to 40% of all kids under 19 years old.

Things like feeling bullied or persecuted, depressed, angry, treated unfairly by someone in authority, grades slipping are all characteristics shared by school shooters. But all those things are shared by millions of kids and the vast majority do not end up as school shooters.

So it's easy to look back and say "this kid was showing lots of signs of heading for trouble" but that ignores all the other kids who show the same signs.

In tech talk, the signal gets lost in all the noise.

I see your point and I agree to a certain extent, however in this particular case, I believe that assaulting an authority figure at the age of 7 shows more problematic characteristics outside of the norm for age 7.

I know sometimes everything that could be done is done (cf alyssa bustamante IMO) and tragedy still occurs.....but often, not enough (if anything at all) is done. as I said, I dont know the family dynamics in this case and I cannot judge, yet if there were ongoing problems in the home I can see how it possibly escalated from assaulting a principal at age 7 to shooting mom in the head at age 10.

 

[southcitymom]

May have been over carrying in firewood....

http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/state/firewood-spat-may-have-come-before-ohio-mom-killed

I ask my 10-year-old to carry firewood in for me every day - really happy he hasn't shot me because of that.

My prayers to this family. Such a sad, sad case.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Yep, just like the AZ case you mentioned earlier. 'Perfect Storm' is a good way to put it.

I am not sure that case was the perfect storm.

It is frightening though when we see some children that seem to have no conscience.

It is also frightening to hear experts say that some aren't treatable..like the expert did in the AZ case.

Every state needs a law that gives the Court permission to hold these rare type of children after the age of 18 or 21 IF the experts have deemed them still a danger to society and untreatable.

The courts knew long ago that Duncan wasn't curable either and we saw the havoc he caused so many innocent victims when he was let out again in society.



IMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I see your point and I agree to a certain extent, however in this particular case, I believe that assaulting an authority figure at the age of 7 shows more problematic characteristics outside of the norm for age 7.

I know sometimes everything that could be done is done (cf alyssa bustamante IMO) and tragedy still occurs.....but often, not enough (if anything at all) is done. as I said, I don't know the family dynamics in this case and I cannot judge, yet if there were ongoing problems in the home I can see how it possibly escalated from assaulting a principal at age 7 to shooting mom in the head at age 10.

It sounds to me this boy has a Conduct Disorder which means he could already be showing psychopathic traits. It is very hard to successfully treat these type of children.

IMO

 

[dgfred]

I am not sure that case was the perfect storm.

It is frightening though when we see some children that seem to have no conscience.

It is also frightening to hear experts say that some aren't treatable..like the expert did in the AZ case.

Every state needs a law that gives the Court permission to hold these rare type of children after the age of 18 or 21 IF the experts have deemed them still a danger to society and untreatable.

The courts knew long ago that Duncan wasn't curable either and we saw the havoc he caused so many innocent victims when he was let out again in society.



IMO

I'm pretty sure.

How could you know if a child really had a conscious? Could they have one later? Could they have one originally... but lose it for various reasons (like abuse or severe trauma? Definately wasn't born that way IMO.

Why would a child not be treatable that did live and will live in society in a few years? I don't believe all the experts agree with the one in that AZ case.

Why would an already emotionally disturbed child (assaulting his pricipal at age 7) be allowed GUNS and AMMO in his own room? Does that denote common sense at ALL by the parent(s)???

Why would a child 8-10 need ANY guns at all? Are they hunting for the family food? Are they protecting the household? I realize a child could choose to kill their parent anyway... but why make it simple?
Why would they even be available? Whether an area's/region's 'custom' or not.

What is stopping a parent from maybe even taking a 8-10 year old hunting or to learn to shoot... then confiscating the gun(s) to avoid the POSSIBILITY of something like has happened in this case? Or even leaving the guns as decor, but NO ammo.

I know I will see post of 'culture of guns' and 'right to bear arms'... but would not common sense prevail over that? Anything can happen with/within a kid's mind IMO. The cons far outweigh the pros of letting children have access to guns with ammo IMO.

 

[waltzingmatilda]

http://www.insideedition.com/news/5572/10-year-old-boy-charged-with-murdering-his-mom.aspx

~interview with boys sister~

wm

 

[EGirl]

I'm pretty sure.

How could you know if a child really had a conscious? Could they have one later? Could they have one originally... but lose it for various reasons (like abuse or severe trauma? Definately wasn't born that way IMO.

Why would a child not be treatable that did live and will live in society in a few years? I don't believe all the experts agree with the one in that AZ case.

Why would an already emotionally disturbed child (assaulting his pricipal at age 7) be allowed GUNS and AMMO in his own room? Does that denote common sense at ALL by the parent(s)???

Why would a child 8-10 need ANY guns at all? Are they hunting for the family food? Are they protecting the household? I realize a child could choose to kill their parent anyway... but why make it simple?
Why would they even be available? Whether an area's/region's 'custom' or not.What is stopping a parent from maybe even taking a 8-10 year old hunting or to learn to shoot... then confiscating the gun(s) to avoid the POSSIBILITY of something like has happened in this case? Or even leaving the guns as decor, but NO ammo.

I know I will see post of 'culture of guns' and 'right to bear arms'... but would not common sense prevail over that? Anything can happen with/within a kid's mind IMO. The cons far outweigh the pros of letting children have access to guns with ammo IMO.

And what is going to stop a then 18/21 year old from getting any weapon he wants? Along with ammo? Who gets to decide if he is a danger then? He has to kill again I guess.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I'm pretty sure.

How could you know if a child really had a conscious? Could they have one later? Could they have one originally... but lose it for various reasons (like abuse or severe trauma? Definitely wasn't born that way IMO.

Why would a child not be treatable that did live and will live in society in a few years? I don't believe all the experts agree with the one in that AZ case.

Why would an already emotionally disturbed child (assaulting his pricipal at age 7) be allowed GUNS and AMMO in his own room? Does that denote common sense at ALL by the parent(s)???

Why would a child 8-10 need ANY guns at all? Are they hunting for the family food? Are they protecting the household? I realize a child could choose to kill their parent anyway... but why make it simple?
Why would they even be available? Whether an area's/region's 'custom' or not.

What is stopping a parent from maybe even taking a 8-10 year old hunting or to learn to shoot... then confiscating the gun(s) to avoid the POSSIBILITY of something like has happened in this case? Or even leaving the guns as decor, but NO ammo.

I know I will see post of 'culture of guns' and 'right to bear arms'... but would not common sense prevail over that? Anything can happen with/within a kid's mind IMO. The cons far outweigh the pros of letting children have access to guns with ammo IMO.

I think it would be rather easy to realize a child didn't have a conscience by their non emotional reactions to things and if they were known early on to bully others, hurt pets or show other bizarre behavior with no remorse. If they have a flat affect about everything they encounter in their lives then imo something is seriously wrong.

No matter how much treatment or research that has been done none of the experts have ever been able to instill a conscience inside of someone who does not have one. They are what they are....just like Joesph Duncan was at 8 years old. He was that same monster when he became an adult.

I think the mother allowed the guns to remain because she had paralyzing fear of her own son. Imo she thought since they were given to HIM... to take them away would enrage her child even more. I think this poor mother walked on eggshells. I think she kept trying to appease this child, and felt if she kept believing in him, and not ruffling his feathers, that his anger would subside in due time.

Yes, there was an article that said in this part of the country children are hunting as soon as they can handle a gun. I fault the father for not removing the guns when the mother ask him to.......I think the mother was much too fearful of her son to do so herself since she had to live with him inside her home.

I really don't know the answer. Other kids have used other brutal lethal weapons to murder their parents and it was something that was used in the home. I really think this boy was a ticking time bomb and while the guns made it easier he could have easily found something else. I think he was determined to kill his mother no matter what. Most parents that are killed by their children aren't aware of the impeding doom.

As far as the 8 year old in AZ.....that was the most chilling case I have ever kept up with. As I watched that child lie so easily to LE and be so good at it and had absolutely no remorse for what he had done.. that will haunt me always. As I watched him... I thought about all the spooky movies I had seen where the child was shown as being evil.

The way he lured a man to his death pretending he needed his help is one of the most evil things I can think of..... So I do believe the expert is right on that case and this boy has no conscience and never will. The only one he cried for was himself when he realized he was caught.......and that is a trait of a child with psychopathic traits, imo.

IMO

 

[dgfred]

And what is going to stop a then 18/21 year old from getting any weapon he wants? Along with ammo? Who gets to decide if he is a danger then? He has to kill again I guess.

Absolutely nothing is stopping it. What is your question exactly? :waitasec:
Possibly not 'allowed' to own weapons if found incompetant is all I know.

 

[dgfred]

@OB,
You know I don't agree with your assessment of the AZ case... or what 'caused' it or what preceeded it. Relevant in a way but not exactly on topic.

You say 'psychopathic traits'... can they not be treated when a child?
Would 'severe' abuse count as not totally the child's fault?
Would leaving multiple guns/with ammo with a child 8-10 with those supposed 'traits' be a wise decision by parents?
Why would a parent(s) make this decision?

I understand you think the woman in this case was 'walking on egg shells' but in the end that was her decision to leave the weapons with the boy. I see NO reason for the boy to have guns/ammo when it was known he was already having behavioral issues. If he was or seemed to be a 'ticking time bomb' surely the parents felt this in a way too... even more reason for the guns to be confiscated.

I am not in ANY WAY saying a parent deserves this no matter the circumstances, but it does seem to have been a perfect storm 'brewing'.

 

[EGirl]

@OB,
You know I don't agree with your assessment of the AZ case... or what 'caused' it or what preceeded it. Relevant in a way but not exactly on topic.

You say 'psychopathic traits'... can they not be treated when a child?
Would 'severe' abuse count as not totally the child's fault?
Would leaving multiple guns/with ammo with a child 8-10 with those supposed 'traits' be a wise decision by parents?
Why would a parent(s) make this decision?

I understand you think the woman in this case was 'walking on egg shells' but in the end that was her decision to leave the weapons with the boy. I see NO reason for the boy to have guns/ammo when it was known he was already having behavioral issues. If he was or seemed to be a 'ticking time bomb' surely the parents felt this in a way too... even more reason for the guns to be confiscated.

I am not in ANY WAY saying a parent deserves this no matter the circumstances, but it does seem to have been a perfect storm 'brewing'.

Psychopathy cannot be cured or even treated well. Some studies suggest the brains of psychopaths are different than those of 'normal' persons. I believe that it is an affliction one is born with.

It doesn't matter what 'causes' it (abuse, etc which I don't believe to be a cause for psychopathy) when the end result is violence (without a doubt) committed by those afflicted with it.

But I will conclude by saying.. we don't know if this child is a psychopath.

JMO

 

[Melanie]

~snipped from article~

Chief Deputy Nathan Fritz of the Holmes County Sheriff's Office said Tuesday authorities found one shotgun, three rifles and a gun rack in the boy's bedroom. Fritz says the .22-caliber rifle authorities believe was used in the shooting was found on the bed.

Oh my! The article states the guns were a gift from the boys now deceased grandfather. This boy should have never had access to guns til he was 21.(or maybe never)

Thanks for the link oh_gal!

wm

That's what I thought. What is a 10 year old doing with guns -- in his bedroom no less. I heard on the news (no link) that the .22 caliber was a Christmas gift.

I'm just gobsmacked at this news!

Mel

 

[Melanie]

Not to stray from the story -- but was this in an area where folks (even kids) were known to have guns. When we lived in the mountains (for about 9 months) I was shocked at all the guns the kids had. Sure, there were mountain lions, bears, etc. But I could never figure out why the parents were so keen on handing out guns to their kids. Needless to say, I'm glad were back in the city.

MOO

Mel

 

[oceanblueeyes]

@OB,
You know I don't agree with your assessment of the AZ case... or what 'caused' it or what preceeded it. Relevant in a way but not exactly on topic.

You say 'psychopathic traits'... can they not be treated when a child?
Would 'severe' abuse count as not totally the child's fault?
Would leaving multiple guns/with ammo with a child 8-10 with those supposed 'traits' be a wise decision by parents?
Why would a parent(s) make this decision?

I understand you think the woman in this case was 'walking on egg shells' but in the end that was her decision to leave the weapons with the boy. I see NO reason for the boy to have guns/ammo when it was known he was already having behavioral issues. If he was or seemed to be a 'ticking time bomb' surely the parents felt this in a way too... even more reason for the guns to be confiscated.

I am not in ANY WAY saying a parent deserves this no matter the circumstances, but it does seem to have been a perfect storm 'brewing'.

Yes, that was her decision and she paid the ultimate price for it.

I think it is easy for others to think the solution was just so simple.....'she/he should have done this or that' etc. but I have found until someone walks in the same shoes.... people really have no clue as to the reasons why someone did or didn't not do certain things. Its easy to point fingers at someone when another isn't having to live that life situation daily. Imo. this mother did not want to die. She had other children and I know she had hopes and dreams for the future.

Parents can fear their children but then also use denial as a coping mechanism to push it out of their minds and convince themselves they are overreacting.

I know what paralyzing fear feels like... although I have never feared my children and they have never given me any reason to. Fear renders a person helpless and a mother's great love can muddy the situation too..... so I don't fault this mother.

I am not talking about any old fear but day in and day out numbing fear where a person just tries to survive the turmoil. I really think even though she feared him she never dreamed he would put a bullet in her brain. I don't think her love for him would let her mind go that far. She knew he had a spitfire temper though and imo she knew if she dared take anything away from him she would be the one to feel the brunt of it. She is not the only parent who desperately wanted to believe their child would never do something like this. That is why the father should have stepped in and helped this mother and removed the guns but maybe he too feared if he did ...what may happen to him.

On Nancy's show they say this boy is actually 11 so the incident with the principal was at least 3 or 4 years ago.

From what I have read through the years children that exhibit psychopathic traits (conduct disorder) cannot be cured.

Why they became the way they are becomes less important to me in the end. It is the fact that some of them are cold, unfeeling, remorseless, untreatable and without a conscience that matters to me... because those children will become adults one day and society will once again have to deal with them. The ones I worry about are all the millions of good children out there that have to deal with so much already and then may have to deal with a child of this kind.

We do not know if the mother had the ammo locked up and the kid could have found it and took the ammo. Parents have even had their guns locked away in a safe and their child broke into the safe and murdered them. Imo, when someone is determined to kill someone........they will.

To me pointing a finger at the victim for her/his own death is fruitless. It is like blaming prostitutes who are raped and murdered since they may have put themselves in a dangerous situation or blaming the woman who wears a tight blouse or short skirt and went out to a bar that is raped and murdered. Most likely most victims could have done something differently...like spouses who stay in an abusive situation, and wind up being killed, but I will never blame a victim for someone else taking their lives so coldly and cruelly. Its just something that leaves me queasy and very uncomfortable.

None of us can be absolutely sure that this boy wouldn't have laid in wait and murdered his mother with something else just as lethal. It certainly has happened before by other young killers who have murdered their parent(s).

All I am thankful for is we don't see these type of kids often.... although I have read two articles in less than two days that say these type of kids who are killing their parent or parents are on the rise and at a young age.

IMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Not to stray from the story -- but was this in an area where folks (even kids) were known to have guns. When we lived in the mountains (for about 9 months) I was shocked at all the guns the kids had. Sure, there were mountain lions, bears, etc. But I could never figure out why the parents were so keen on handing out guns to their kids. Needless to say, I'm glad were back in the city.

MOO

Mel

Yes, the police said this area is very much hunting country were children are taught to use a gun as soon as they can handle the gun. Even younger than this kid.

And they said they have never had anything like this happen before so that shows me it is not the accessibilty to weapons but the individual child who has a murderous intent.

IMO

 

[Linda7NJ]

What I find ironic..

people who feel kids that commit first degree murder deserve a second chance are the very same people yelling about keeping guns under lock & key away from children.


We know not every gun has been involved in a shooting of another human being. The vast majority of even police weapons are never drawn on another human being. Yet those same people want a murderer set free in the HOPE they've been rehabilitated.

Really.... which is more dangerous?

:waitasec:

 

[gitana1]

Psychopathy cannot be cured or even treated well. Some studies suggest the brains of psychopaths are different than those of 'normal' persons. I believe that it is an affliction one is born with.

It doesn't matter what 'causes' it (abuse, etc which I don't believe to be a cause for psychopathy) when the end result is violence (without a doubt) committed by those afflicted with it.

But I will conclude by saying.. we don't know if this child is a psychopath.

JMO

I think it was Dr. Robert Hare, leading researcher into psychopaths, who stated that young people with such traits may be amenable to treatment as their brains are still changing and growing. He believes adults cannot change except for via behavior modification which teaches the psychopath that bad behavior is self-destructive and will lead to bad things for the psychopath, an approach that may or may not have much utility. I can't yet find a link for the belief that budding child psychopaths can change their brain wiring. It may be in a book I have. Still looking.

http://www.hare.org/links/saturday.html
Hare has co-developed a new treatment program specifically for violent psychopaths, using what he knows about the psychopathic personality. The idea is to encourage them to be better by appealing not to their (non-existent) altruism but to their (abundant) self-interest.
"It's not designed to change personality, but to modify behaviour by, among other things, convincing them that there are ways they can get what they want without harming others," Hare explains. The program will try to make them understand that violence is bad, not for society, but for the psychopath himself. (Look where it got you: jail.)