Panorama - Are you Good or Evil?

[China Doll]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b014kj65

I watched this when it was on, (unfortunately that link is no longer available but you can see a clip with it). I thought it was very interesting but after some more consideration decided that it didn't really tell us anything new. (I had heard of the study on the brain/imaging thing before (not sure how), and also I think the warrior gene thing wasn't new to me either. Of course the nature/nurture argument isn't a new one either).

I was left wondering what significant use this information is to us? And what practical use can we put all this information to? I work for a consultant who runs child protection clinics and needless to say we have some very disturbed children coming to clinic. In context of this background, I wonder if we already know that a child has had a very troubled background, would it be worth doing a brain scan and identifying whether they had this warrior gene in order to best help the child as they get older deal with their past? (My consultant who normally gets these questions of mine dumped on her is unfortunately out the country!). Is there anything we can do with this information that would be useful/helpful for the future of children who have had really troubling starts in life?

I just think that information and knowing something is all well and good but if you can't apply it to do something useful then what's the point in even having it?

Ahem... Sorry this sounds like a bit of a ramble, but I've been thinking about it for a while and it's all a bit jumbled in my head.

Cheers :c)

[sandyRoe]

It doesn't always follow that an abusive childhood produces a monstrous adult. I suppose such children need to be told that what happened to them wasn't their fault and they shouldn't feel guilty or ashamed.
Helping them to believe it is another matter.

[rov1100]

This was discussed a couple of weeks ago. In fact it was an Horizon program. Certain numbers of the population have this warrior gene. Couple this with a bad upbringing makes them more likely to be killers. Having this gene on its owndoes not necessarily mean they will be killers though.

[China Doll]

Yes, I know that, thank you both of you. What I'm referring to is if you have a child who has had an abusive background, should you automatically investigate for the other two things with view to helping the child. My question is about applying what we've learnt and not the discussion that we already had, (I was involved in that thread :c)

[sandyRoe]

Did the programme say that some adults have a genetic predisposition to murderous violence? I'm not sure I'd believe that.
I'd say that a child who had been abused might have learned that violence is the way to get what you want. If they carried that lesson into adult life it could make big problems for them and their victims.

[China Doll]

It talked about a study they did of muderers/psychopaths that showed that what they all had in common was the warrior gene AND the unusual brain scan. It was also revealed that the chap leading on the project did in fact have both those components himself (a bit of a shock to him) BUT he said himself he had an idealic childhood. Hence my question about applying the knowledge and how we use it rather than a general discussion about what is good and evil... does that make sense? I don't think I've phrased the whole question very well at all.

[jake-the-peg]

I think there are two important points here:

1/ Do people with troubled childhoods and the brain function and DNA of a psychopath necessarilly act violently?

I understand that they have a greater tendency to but how strong exactly is this effect?

2/ If this effect is strong and it's used in court as a mitigating factor then should it not be used in parole hearings in the same way?

If someone is so genetically prone to violence and has the background too why would you grant parole?

The first point goes some way to the Is it usefull? question, the second how is it usefull

[China Doll]

Going to point one is what I was thinking of and you raise a good point about the strength of the effect. So I'm thinking if we know there is a greater tendency then how do we go about applying that knowledge to help the child?

[rowanwitch]

If we know a child has learned an abusve pattern and had the warrior gene it might be possible with intensive behaviour modification techniques to 'over ride' some of it...or at least give them a degree of impulse control. At least then it may be possible to reduce the risk of serious aggressive acts...
wouldn't work with a true sociopath though I guess

[jake-the-peg]

Well there is the possibility of earlier intervention if it is known that the child has greater genetic vulnerability.

But that is an ethical minefield.

Given that we now that underactivity of a certain part of brain function is a contributing factor there is the possibility of developing new drugs that might help.

But the focus of a lot of this seems to be more directed at protection of society rather than directly at the affected individual

[China Doll]

Why is it an ethical minefield? What difference would it make? if you had something targeted at the health of a specific indiviual, then surely that's a good thing? (Sorry, that sounds like I'm argueing, I'm not, they're genuine questions).

[jake-the-peg]

Why is it an ethical minefield?

Well first you've got the issue of genetic testing of minors - is this open and optional?

"Dear Mr and Mrs Smith we want to test Johnny to se if he's a psycho"

That's not going to happen is it?

If you start DNA testing for this what else are you going to look for at the same time?

You are descriminating against people on the basis of DNA - something they have no control over

We're getting dangerosly close to Eugenics here.

Even if the parents give their consent - is it theirs to give?

My Wife has a gene which makes her very susceptible to cancer. We have not chosen to have our children tested - that is a decision for them to take later in life.

Like I say Ethical minefield

These are just the first ones off the top of my head

[China Doll]

Maybe I'm being too simplistic but I see it more as testing so that if you find this to be true you are better informed to help and set up specific support for a child and nothing discriminating at all about it. I'm thinking to use it as a useful tool and nothing more.

[daffy654]

I had a very abusive childhood and would have taken very much against anyone who wanted to test me to see if I was ever going to be a killer.
I had a hard enough childhood without that added stigma.

[jake-the-peg]

I think you're not considering the way these things can work.

Right now I think Insurance companies for example are not allowed to ask for results of DNA tests.

That could change in the future.

Perhaps you want to join the Police in the future - should they have the right to see your DNA profile before accepting you?

You could be rejected despite never having done a thing wrong!

Yet surely it would be in the public interest to weed out any police officers with psychopathic profiles before they were ever accepted.

Wouldn't it?

[China Doll]

Hi Daffy! Hope you're well... :c)

Maybe I'm not explaining myself very well. I understand what you're both saying but just because you have one, two or all of these things, I'm not talking about thinking you're a potential killer at all! I'm talking about thinking you might have specific needs, perhaps present/standard counselling methods may not be in the best interests for example and as a child you deserve the best care in the world that can be given to you. Especially if you've had a horrific start. I'm looking at it more from being able to see that someone is more vulnerable and needs a bit of extra care. I guess I'm thinking in my family I know there's a tendency towards depression and alcholism, something I think is not just a nurture thing and perhaps we have something that pre-disposes us to reacting differently to situations that might not have the same effect on other people. Because I have noticed this, I'm very aware of trigger points for depression, I never drink when I am feeling depressed because of what I've seen it do to relatives etc... I think that sort of knowledge is a good thing and not bad because it means I think about the choices I make and the situations I put myself in... Isn't that a good thing?

And in this program there was talk about a lot of psychopathic people living and working amongst us which I actually thought was quite pointless. Just because you don't see the world the same way as others means nothing. Obviously not all psychopaths are out there murdering and causing carnage and in fact, this fella that was leading the project I mentioned who it turned out had the gene and the unusual pattern is actually doing amazing work so I don't see what difference it makes at all.

Maybe I am just being naive about the whole thing. Especially in view of the DNA/ insurance stuff in the future. I just think that if you have information and you apply it to do some good then that's the best possible thing... otherwise the information becomes pointless and just something that is interesting to know but that's it. And I guess there's a part of me that has seen so many kids pass through our doors that just wants them to have the best possible care so that their futures aren't blighted by their past.

Does any of that make sense?!

[jake-the-peg]

I think I understand what you're saying but getting a DNA analysis is a very big can of worms, a real Pandora's box that you can't get the lid back on after.

You may have people's best interest at heart but once that information is learned it can't be unlearned - either by the testing organisation or by yourself.

Ask yourself this question - If you might have say the Hodgkinsons Gene which would mean that you would almost inevitably die a particularly unpleasant death in your 50s and there was nothing anyone could do about it.

Would you want to know?

Some people would, many would not

You can't force that knowing on people

[China Doll]

Yes I guess so.

I still think people should be given a choice though.

[jake-the-peg]

Oh yes, the choice absolutely.

But when you're dealing with children you have to ask how informed that choice is.

[China Doll]

Depends on the child in my experience Jake. And the situation as well. You have to take a lot of it individual by individual and case by case.

I read through this again and can see why people thought I was implying that the children in my clinic may be potential killers though! Shoud really have tried to phrase it all better :c)

[Ankou]

i can spot an evil child just by looking at it.

some kids just have 'that' face.