Poll for the Armchair Psychologists

[TorisMom003]

Was the Perfect Son born bad? What about the mothering he received?



http://solreymusic.blogspot.com/2012/12/insights-into-adam-lanzas.html

How about both. His mother obviously was not someone that was mentally well herself so then she passed those traits onto the son. The cycle continued and the son did the unthinkable. However, as long as the son has no children of his own and had no other siblings then that particular cycle will have been broken.

MOO

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Was the Perfect Son born bad? What about the mothering he received?

http://solreymusic.blogspot.com/2012/12/insights-into-adam-lanzas.html

You are 100% right .. check the video I put upstream too .. really abnormal. I'm on the it's nature + nurture side of this debate

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

We inherit everything from our forefathers yet some here think it is impossible to inherit traits, temperment, personality?

And just so I'm not misunderstood: Research supports the basis for personality disorders (and some mood disorders) as being from either a genetic component ("nature") or related to upbringing/stressors ("nurture").

This is nothing new......

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

In my work I have been up close and personal with murders rapists and the worst of the worst. I have visited many prisons to assess suitability for parenting. Does that make me qualified to comment?
JA is not a psychopath, nothing anywhere near it. That is the opinion of the State witness and mine.
If I suffered from Borderline Personality Disorder right now, I would be terrified out of my wits at the utter lack of mindfulness and sensitivity of their 'situation' resulting from abhorrent childhood abuse.

The characterisations of their suffering is quite offensive on many levels, so I will not adopt a policy of killing them, they did nothing to earn such brutalisation now or when they were children.
I am also particularly horrified at a State which didn't identify children experiencing childhood abuse, - especially when it goes on for six years.

It is patently obvious to everybody that childhood trauma creates damaged individuals, so why clamour for a death penalty when precious funds could be used to prevent trauma to children, it would make far more sense to treat the problems before they originate, not after?
I have serious questions about a State, public, school and family that allowed abuse to continue for six tortuous years without any intervention.
That's a sick society in my opinion, and no-one has to agree with me.

“La justice flétrit, la prison corrompt et la société a les criminels qu’elle mérite.

"Justice shrivels up, prison corrupts and society has the criminals it deserves."
Alexandre Lacassagne (1843-1924)

?????????

Personally, you could get verified and as such be qualified.
I don't know if you were seriously asking or what???

 

[Emmi]

Was the Perfect Son born bad? What about the mothering he received?



http://solreymusic.blogspot.com/2012/12/insights-into-adam-lanzas.html

Yes, see--it isn't always what it seems at first glance.

This boy lacked for nothing, and it probably appeared to others that his parents were very gentle and loving, and that, maybe, he was spoiled rotten. But, there can be weird, insidious stuff under the surface. It's possible, too, that the mother didn't know what she was doing was perverse. Such behaviour may have been normalized in her family ... yuck.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

I will respond on the babies are innocents, but I have to tell you, I am more than awestruck by this.

People actually believe that a tiny baby is evil?

I can refer to studies that talk about difficult babies. But it does not matter what studies people site because it appears that people see what they want to see and disregard the rest.

If one reads the studies by Catherine Bateson who studied mothers and infants "talking" with each other and what happened when the mother did not follow the cues.

We do not know if Jodi was abused because we have no information except for that which we can guess, just like those who guess she was not.

The only interest to me of what Jodi is because I want us to learn from it and not repeat those errors.

People learned a lot from orphanage studies.

People learned about not having bright lights and noise for preemies,

We learn a lot about being better and better.

But saying a baby is born evil, that astounds me and probably any person who works with children and parents.

Well, how about this then? Instead of saying a baby could be born evil--how about saying that a baby may be born with a genetic predisposition to becoming a Sociopath ( a la Dr. Hare's study on the brain ) based on the fact that his forefather's were Sociopaths and also that the brain scans show that anomoly at an early age?
It is simple genetics.
Isn't it similar to saying that the same baby could be prone to Tay Sach's Disease if his parents have it, or a hemophelic or any number of genetic diseases if it's in the genes? Isn't it the same as saying that the baby will probably have blue eyes if both parents have them?

Of course abuse, invalidation, sexual assaults, lack of stimuli, isolation, lack of communication, lack of basic needs, etc may cause pathology ***but*** there may be a genetic component at play that should not be overlooked as well. That is my point. Genetics is not soley the only factor that comes into play but it is important nonetheless.

The ole' nature vs. nurture debate ad nauseum........:banghead:

 

[Emmi]

How about both. His mother obviously was not someone that was mentally well herself so then she passed those traits onto the son. The cycle continued and the son did the unthinkable. However, as long as the son has no children of his own and had no other siblings then that particular cycle will have been broken.

MOO

Was he adopted, though? There may be no biological link to these supposed passed-on traits.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Biography

NO, Brian was an only child. His parents were biological.

Brian Blackwell was born in 1986, an only child, to Sydney, a retired accountant and Jacqueline, an antiques dealer. When Blackwell was two-years-old, his parents, described as respectable and ‘a nice, solid couple’, moved to the affluent village of Melling in Merseyside, where they bought a three-bedroom bungalow. Blackwell was seen as a gentle boy but a bit of a loner, not easily disposed to making friends, either at school or in the home environment.

At school he was an exemplary student and in his teens was nicknamed ‘The Brains’ by his friends. He studied for his A–Levels at Liverpool College and had decided to become a medical surgeon. Blackwell’s doting and supportive parents had high hopes for their son, believing he had the potential to become a great surgeon.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Yes, see--it isn't always what it seems at first glance.

This boy lacked for nothing, and it probably appeared to others that his parents were very gentle and loving, and that, maybe, he was spoiled rotten. But, there can be weird, insidious stuff under the surface. It's possible, too, that the mother didn't know what she was doing was perverse. Such behaviour may have been normalized in her family ... yuck.

Or maybe he lied


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Emmi]

Well, how about this then? Instead of saying a baby could be born evil--how about saying that a baby may be born with a genetic predisposition to becoming a Sociopath ( a la Dr. Hare's study on the brain ) based on the fact that his forefather's were Sociopaths and also that the brain scans show that anomoly at an early age?
It is simple genetics.
Isn't it similar to saying that the same baby could be prone to Tay Sach's Disease if his parents have it, or a hemophelic or any number of genetic diseases if it's in the genes? Isn't it the same as saying that the baby will probably have blue eyes if both parents have them?

Of course abuse, invalidation, sexual assaults, lack of stimuli, isolation, lack of communication, lack of basic needs, etc may cause pathology ***but*** there may be a genetic component at play that should not be overlooked as well. That is my point. Genetics is not soley the only factor that comes into play but it is important nonetheless.

The ole' nature vs. nurture debate as nauseum........:banghead:

I have no doubt that personality traits and temperament are passed on from parents to children in the same way that hair and eye colour are. But now we're comparing personality disorders to genetic diseases and errors, such as with chromosomes?

I thought that it's been hammered, over and over again in this thread, that personality disorders are NOT mental illnesses? And that, according to several posters, PDs are not to be counted as mitigating factors in criminal cases, and that the disordered person bears total responsibility for his/her choices? At the same time, however, they are defective--born that way, always and ever, and irredeemably so--and because of that, executing them is appropriate?

There are just so many points at which, to my mind, these arguments fall apart ...

ETA: and because of that interaction between nature and nurture--a kid wired in a certain way, say, becomes a monster when forced to endure neglect and/or abuse--that would seem to be a strong argument that environment should be our PRIMARY concern. It's the one factor that can be modified for the better.

Perhaps then all these little sociopaths budding in the womb could, instead, become our air traffic controllers and brain surgeons? That's a semi-serious thought!

 

[beach]

What thread am I on???

Reviewing.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

I have no doubt that personality traits and temperament are passed on from parents to children in the same way that hair and eye colour are. But now we're comparing personality disorders to genetic diseases and errors, such as with chromosomes?

I thought that it's been hammered, over and over again in this thread, that personality disorders are NOT mental illnesses? And that, according to several posters, PDs are not to be counted as mitigating factors in criminal cases, and that the disordered person bears total responsibility for his/her choices? At the same time, however, they are defective--born that way, always and ever, and irredeemably so--and because of that, executing them is appropriate?

There are just so many points at which, to my mind, these arguments fall apart ...

They shouldn't be mitigating factors because they do not cause people to commit crimes, regardless of nature or nurture. That's the important point. Murder, rape, etc. are not symptoms of mental illness/PD. Same way that a physical ailment like heart disease should not mitigate murder.

The person with the disorder must bear responsibility for their choices...because they are in fact choices, not something that an illness/PD forces them to do.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

I have no doubt that personality traits and temperament are passed on from parents to children in the same way that hair and eye colour are. But now we're comparing personality disorders to genetic diseases and errors, such as with chromosomes?

I thought that it's been hammered, over and over again in this thread, that personality disorders are NOT mental illnesses? And that, according to several posters, PDs are not to be counted as mitigating factors in criminal cases, and that the disordered person bears total responsibility for his/her choices? At the same time, however, they are defective--born that way, always and ever, and irredeemably so--and because of that, executing them is appropriate?

There are just so many points at which, to my mind, these arguments fall apart ...

Emmi: Imo, you are mixing concepts here so perhaps it's better to break it down as such:

First, mental illness is a broad term. The Law does not perceive AXIS II disorders (personality disorders) as insanity--and insanity being the factor to taking the Death Penalty off the table in the case, specifically of JA and others. AXIS I disorders (ex. Schizophrenia) can take the DP off the table.

Now, taking the Law out of play and getting into the discussion here at WS, some posters do not believe that there is a genetic component to mental illness, of which I disagree. I think mental illness can be either inherited or causational. Recent empirical research supports this as well. It is important to understand the etiology of illnesses. Brain scans have shown differences in the brains structure and neurology that seems to be inherited---just like everything else we inherit from our forefathers. Just the facts, simple as that.

Last, to bring into whether or not the Death Penalty is ethical/moral is another can of worms.

Perhaps breaking it down like I did helps?

:seeya:

 

[shelley921]

How about both. His mother obviously was not someone that was mentally well herself so then she passed those traits onto the son. The cycle continued and the son did the unthinkable. However, as long as the son has no children of his own and had no other siblings then that particular cycle will have been broken.

MOO

yes both makes the most sense to me. wow Brian's mother bathed him as a teenager-??- gads! and I had no idea Adam Lanza's mother followed him into the bathroom and smothered him...ugh...

 

[Kaddy Wonders]

A few things I'm left with, diagnosing Jodi, as memories of interviews and testimony are slowly receding from this case.

When Jodi's parents told about the "pot on the roof" when Jodi was 14, her mother said they called the cops and turned her in. If Jodi had been a normal kid, and if the parents had maintained loving boundaries, I'm not sure they would have immediately called LE. It seems to me a lot of behavioral issues, disrespect likely, had been causing chaos for a long time. We don't know whether their inadequate parenting styles or Jodi's defiance/disorder were the cause, or how much weight to give each side of that. MOO.

I'm still struck by Jodi's use of the word "betrayed." She said she felt betrayed by her mom when she was spanked with the spoon. Something tells me she meant that, in her twisted perspective. Then she said she felt the jury betrayed her, iow, did not live up to Jodi's expectations of them, of their believing her. I haven't heard a perp calling the jury's verdict a betrayal before.

Lastly, Jeff MacDonald was another killer who was deemed a narcissistic sociopath. I just thought of him when reading of the Brian Blackwell case here.

 

[beach]

Clarifying the parameters for discussion on this thread -


The Mormon religion is not on trial in the Jodi Arias case, nor is the Alexander family on trial. Likewise regarding Travis - he is the victim of a horrific murder. Don't go there.


The Psych thread was specifically set up to discuss Jodi Arias.

Keep the focus of the psych speculation limited to JODI.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Personally, I think JA is going to be ticked-off that other trials have come up and are starting to get a lot of media play.

HLN is off onto another big case.

JA will suddenly be somewhat forgotten from our media. How can she possibly handle that? She will be raging at the lack of media attention 'cause it's like they betrayed her. Her media-audience has betrayed her and now they are all bad, all disloyal. JA may feel they have abandoned her at the time she needs them the most.

These thoughts are my perspectives on what JA will be feeling psychologically. :scared:



RIP TA.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I genuinely believe that JA thinks reporters are her 'friends' and that she is convincing .. NPD filtering all her perceptions.

 

[SMK]

How about both. His mother obviously was not someone that was mentally well herself so then she passed those traits onto the son. The cycle continued and the son did the unthinkable. However, as long as the son has no children of his own and had no other siblings then that particular cycle will have been broken.

MOO

I do not see indications of both. What I see is a mother who violated boundaries to such a degree, the son HAD to have felt rage at her, and at the father who complied.

What if a father bathed a teenage daughter? What would that be called?

His mother molested him repeatedly, IMO. One would have to experience that as an adolescent male to know if that rage did not blow up over that girl he loved, and panic to break from these very sick parents.

 

[Emmi]

Emmi: Imo, you are mixing concepts here so perhaps it's better to break it down as such:

First, mental illness is a broad term. The Law does not perceive AXIS II disorders (personality disorders) as insanity--and insanity being the factor to taking the Death Penalty off the table in the case, specifically of JA and others. AXIS I disorders (ex. Schizophrenia) can take the DP off the table.

Now, taking the Law out of play and getting into the discussion here at WS, some posters do not believe that there is a genetic component to mental illness, of which I disagree. I think mental illness can be either inherited or causational. Recent empirical research supports this as well. It is important to understand the etiology of illnesses. Brain scans have shown differences in the brains structure and neurology that seems to be inherited---just like everything else we inherit from our forefathers. Just the facts, simple as that.

Last, to bring into whether or not the Death Penalty is ethical/moral is another can of worms.

Perhaps breaking it down like I did helps?

:seeya:

I'm aware that the law does not consider a PD form of insanity, a mental defect. I have been addressing the idea--not mine--that a PD is an in-born defect, about which nothing can be done, and, at the same time, that that the person with a PD is fully responsible for his/her choices. There is a conflict there.

And, I was not conflating personality traits with personality disorders. It was your post which compared the genetic component of PDs with the heritability of temperament, eye colour and genetic diseases. Again, I see a problem with comparing sociopathy with inherited eye colour and disease--which nobody asks for, and therefore cannot be blamed for.