Thank you very much.
The lockdown protesters are law abiding citizens, as far as I
know, and I would go so far as to say their reaction is healthy:
they are angry that they are losing their livelihood.
Their education is insufficient (to say the least) and their way
of protesting is really not wise when facing a contagious virus,
but what other means do they have with the resources they have and
the (almost) failed state in which they live?
[log in to unmask]">
Hi folks. I'm not sure if I'm the only sociologist
within the ToK Society listserv, but I'll weigh in with two
issues: 1) distal vs. proximal causes; and 2) "explaining" vs.
"excusing" behavior.
On the first issue, I'm following up on Lene's
distinction between childhood and adult issues. A major
limitation in our sociological research revolves around the
problem of studying behavior in "real time" and "over time."
We rarely conduct the types of studies that would allow us to
model human behavior over time and evaluate the "mechanisms"
that produce different behavioral outcomes, whether at the
individual or group level. We certainly do very little
experimental research or RCTs. That said, it's not uncommon in
sociology to conduct waves of surveys or retrospective
interviews to assess childhood experiences. What comes out of
these studies are suggestive correlations or the
identification of "risk factors" associated with certain
outcomes. Often the "outcomes" in question are "bad" things
that happen or that people do (which speaks to the second
issue that I'll get to in a few moments). Let me us a study of
mine that I published in 2017 to illustrate.
I interviewed two "matched" cohorts of males mostly in
their early 20s: 1) 38 inmates who had been convicted of
murder, attempted murder or violent robberies from Ontario;
and 2) 66 university students of the same generation and
raised in Ontario as well. The in-depth, retrospective
interviews covered 4 time periods: 1) early childhood (< 6
years old); 2) transition to adolescence; 3) high school
years; and 4) early adulthood. Long story short, the sample of
convicted "violent offenders" were far more likely to have
experienced "toxic childhood environments," defined as having
been exposed to a minimum of 3 of the following 6 conditions:
|
Table 2: Parental
Behaviors by Age Five for Inmates and
Students
|
Parental
Behaviors
|
%
Inmates
(n
= 38)
|
%
Students
(n
= 66)
|
|
Daily drinking or alcoholism
|
57.9
|
45.5
|
|
Drug use or addiction
|
44.7
|
6.1
|
|
Criminal involvement
|
21.1
|
4.5
|
|
Family violence/spousal
conflict
|
76.3
|
16.7
|
|
Child maltreatment
|
57.9
|
13.7
|
|
Family instability
|
47.4
|
12.1
|
|
|
In total, 30 of 38 inmates experienced at least 3 of
the above conditions through age 5. Only 2 of the university
students had experienced similar "toxic childhood experiences"
over the course of their entire childhood years. The
differences in early childhood experience, combined with what
happened at each key life transition (e.g., about half of the
inmates with the toxic environments had joined gangs by the
time they were teens), led the two cohorts down very different
pathways that landed them in vastly different state
institutions. As young adults (18-24), the inmates were far
more likely to have committed violent crimes (and most did not
complete high school) and most of the university students had
not. That's the overall, simplified view.
People then ask me about how I can interview violent
offenders and not react to some of the awful stories that I
hear about (and, yes, some of the violent offences are quite
disturbing and predatory in nature). I make the point that I'm
not there trying to "excuse" the behavior or condone what they
have done, but rather I'm just trying to understand their
pathways into violent criminality and compare that with people
who have gone down different pathways. It's obviously a quite
inexact science, at least with the methodology that I used. At
the same time, these data (and many other studies) confirm
that there are indeed many "risk factors" and long-lasting
impacts of adverse childhood experiences (e.g., the narratives
and examples the inmates provide of what actually happened to
them are in many cases even more disturbing than their
eventual crimes). And that's our conundrum. We want to explain
why people do "bad" things without "excusing" or condoning the
behavior. And that's why there's a parallel struggle in the
criminal justice system in the efforts to balance the
"punishments" (or "retribution") for bad behavior with the
"therapeutic" dimensions aimed at "rehabilitation." And this
gets to the core of some philosophical differences too in
terms of the main objective of the criminal justice system
(e.g., retribution vs. rehabilitation).
I hope this is helpful in terms of the contextual view
that I take as a sociologist. What I did
not do or have access to would be the psychosocial
profiles of the inmates or students, especially in relation to
the critical junctures and life events. I don't know how many
would register as having mental illnesses, for example, or how
many had conditions such as ADD/ADHD (though some volunteered
such info). I mainly know (imperfectly) with
some degree of confidence that being raised in toxic
environments drastically increased the odds of doing violent,
horrible stuff happening in young adulthood. The university
students had far less toxic environments by comparison and,
when they
did do "bad" things as teens or start down different
pathways, they had more resources and social supports to help
get them back on track (e.g., more likely to have parents
deeply involved in their lives or a teacher or a coach who
invested heavily or loved them unconditionally).
An editorial observation. Almost all of the inmates,
while not necessarily "enlightened Buddhas" or people who
would likely be in my inner circle of friends, were actually
fairly "normal" in terms of our conversations, the efforts
they were taking to improve their schooling, aspirations for
not ending up back in jail, family concerns, etc. I'm not
suggesting that they're mainly getting all that they need in
prison and will come out as role models - many still have
their own problems with addictions, lack of credentials, psych
issues that are beyond my bailiwick, while many also lack
support systems if/when they get out. That said, there were 3
people (of 38) whom I, as a non-psychologist, experienced as
deeply disturbed in my interactions with them (they were
"nice" to me, for what that's worth) in terms of how they
conveyed their stories, the "lack of remorse" or "empathy", or
other signs of various disturbances. Hating to sound
judgmental, in these 3 cases I remember thinking "I'm really
glad you're locked up because you truly come across as deeply
disturbed" (but I just smiled and thanked them for sharing
their stories!).
In closing, I guess I'd say "it's complicated" when
we're trying to understand "adult behavior," due to the
interplay of distal (e.g., childhood experiences) and proximal
factors (neighborhoods, racism, unemployment, credentials,
financial struggles, current relationships, etc.) to explain
"why" people behave as they do, to say nothing about how we
then
evaluate the behavior from a moral standpoint. On the
latter point, what we
do know as one of the few "iron laws of sociology"?
The greater the social/cultural distance between the observer
and the individual/group observed, the greater the likelihood
of our viewing their behavior or even their very existence in
a negative light. Conversely, we are far more understanding
and forgiving of our intimates to the point where we deny that
they could possibly be responsible for "bad" behavior (e.g.,
"my son would
never do that - I didn't raise a monster!).
Wishing you all peace,
health, and understanding, -joe
Dr. Joseph H.
Michalski
King’s University College at
Western University
266 Epworth Avenue, DL-201
London, Ontario, Canada N6A 2M3
Tel: (519) 433-3491
Email: [log in to unmask]
______________________
eiπ + 1 = 0
Hi Catherine,
Good question, thank you.
There are two sets of issues, the second with two sub-sets
of issues:
- Things that went wrong in childhood and have lasting
consequences
- Things that went wrong in adulthood
- Individual issues
- Societal issues
The 2-2 societal issues must be
addressed politically and culturally, not as mental health /
illness.
/ Lene
On 27-04-2020 17:01, Wilson,
Katherine Christine - wilso3kc wrote:
As I am following this conversation, I
find myself a bit confused.
I am understanding that people are saying that
we should not view mindsets that lead to becoming a child
soldier or "social distancing protestor" as stemming from
mental illness, but rather from societal inequities.
However, are not most mental illnesses often the result of
some inequity, trauma, repression, suppression, power
dynamic, or developmental challenge due to lack of proper
care, education, and access to basic core needs being met?
I am not understanding how an individual who becomes
borderline or depressed as an adult, after a childhood
that involves abuse, rape, poverty, and/or neglect, is
different from someone who protests in the streets as a
result of job insecurity, xenophobic upbringings, and poor
education?
where do we draw the line between mental
illness and social inequity? I am genuinely a bit stuck
here...
Thanks Lene. Agreed.
Child soldiers and gang members are
to be understood and helped with compassion and
in ways that explicitly address the social,
economic, and political contexts that placed
their lives in such turmoil. Approaching "these
people" as if they are mentally ill is the wrong
frame.
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 27,
2020, at 9:40 AM, Lene Rachel Andersen -
Nordic Bildung / Fremvirke <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
Hello everybody,
I think the best way to fight
the idiocy is to produce a stronger
narrative.
What actually makes America
great?
American science, American
ingenuity, American medicine, American
collaboration, American expertise,
American health care workers, American
hardship, American perseverance, American
spirit, American doctors, American
technicians, American nurses, American...
And have somebody whom the Trump
segment admires tout that story as loudly
as possible; addressing anxious people who
are under-educated, who have lost their
livelihood in the globalized economy and
who react understandably to a situation
that leaves them powerless as a mental
health issue would be an arrogant mistake.
/ Lene
On 27-04-2020
15:14, nysa71 wrote:
Hi ToK Society,
An excellent --- though disturbing ---
article where Yale psychiatrist,
Brandy Lee, is interviewed:
"A Yale
psychiatrist has warned that
pro-Trump lockdown protesters,
who exhibit similar psychology
as 'child soldiers,' could
quickly turn into 'armed
troops in the streets' if the
president loses his
re-election bid.
"Dr. Bandy
X. Lee, a forensic
psychiatrist at the Yale
School of Medicine, said the
armed protests were a
natural evolution of the
loyalty President Trump
demands from his supporters.
Many of these protests have
evidently been organized by
deep-pocketed groups allied
with the president."
############################
To unsubscribe from the
TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the
TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L
list: write to:
mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1