Key Words: Deviant behavior, mental disorder/illness,
stigma, victimization, violence
First and foremost
I would like to thank everyone who has guided me through this arduous process.
I would not have been able to complete it successfully without all of your
support. I would like to thank Professor Troisi for his encouragement
and guidance. You were able to challenge my writing skills and organizational
techniques. I would not have been nearly as proud of this work without
your constant critiques and supervision. Next I would like to thank
my parents for making me smile and being able to handle my stress and mood
swings. Without your constant support and love I would not be the
person who I am, and I would not have been able to appreciate the simple
things in life. Lastly, I would like to thank all of my friends and
roommates. You were the ones who had to deal with my constant bouts
of “insanity” and remind me that “everything would be ok.” Without
your encouragement and support I would never have been able to cope with
the daily hassles and stresses that tended to overwhelm me. Thank
you all so very much.
the mentally ill has many negative effects. This literature review
supports the stance that the mentally ill are not as violent as society perceives
them to be. The harmful effects that are a consequence of the stigma
are thoroughly acknowledged and believed to be a detriment to society.
Many significant aspects of this topic are evaluated which aid in the awareness
and misconceptions of mental illness and stigma.
There is a consistent pattern
of stereotypes that repeatedly accompany the diagnoses of various mental
illnesses. These stigmas have the ability to decrease the self confidence
of a person and reduce the self-esteem of someone who suffers from an illness.
Link et al. (2001), for example, addressed how stigma can negatively affect
a person who suffers from a mental illness, and that the reactions from others
initially influence the self esteem of the person. Throughout time
people who have been diagnosed as mentally ill have been treated differently
and have constantly been viewed as “ignorant”, “dangerous” and “unintelligent.”
The media has been an aid to these stereotypes by constantly reinforcing
and influencing the labels that people have bestowed to the mentally handicapped.
Hollywood has often made the distinct mistake of adhering to the beliefs
and ideas that everyone who is mentally challenged is “crazy”, and will violently
lash out and assault an innocent person (Teplin, 1985). The public
has been raised with the media making these negative assumptions that have
become accepted as factual by most people. The fear that society has
towards the mentally ill and the crimes that are committed renders the determined
attitude that they should be punished harshly regardless of their disorder
(Lohman, 1997). Society desires to see justice implemented rather
than support the beneficial treatment that could be applied to the mentally
A prevalent thought that constantly possess the minds
of the general public is that most people who have a mental handicap are
violent and at a high risk to commit serious crimes. Although it has
been presented that many perpetrators have been diagnosed as mentally ill;
other factors must be acknowledged for the reasons why these people have
committed violent crimes (Wiener, 1999). People will repeatedly assume
that those who commit atrocious crimes must be mentally unstable; however,
society does not consider the other factors that may have motivated the violent
incident. The concept of a mentally ill person harming another human
being has been instilled into many people’s minds, thus causing people with
a mental illness to receive discriminatory reactions by the public. These
negative reactions have caused a majority of the mentally ill to view themselves
as more different than they are. Numerous psychologists, psychiatrists,
criminologists and sociologists have repeatedly researched the study of mentally
ill offenders. The one question that desires an answer is, “Why do
most people fear those who are mentally ill, even if they have proven themselves
to be nonviolent?” Hodgins and Lalonde (1999) reported that numerous
studies that have been conducted support the hypothesis that the mentally
ill population is equally as likely as the general population to commit criminal
acts. It has been asserted numerous times that only a small number
of crimes are attributable to the mentally ill and that it is the clinician’s
responsibility in identifying the people who pose a threat to society (Clark,
2002). Society has the popular conviction that offenders commit crimes
as a result of their mental illness; however there are numerous other variables
that need to be taken into consideration when identifying the motives.
If these other factors are not recognized, society will continue to brand
people with mental limitations as future felons.
There are many topics that are addressed in relation
to stigma and the mentally ill. The general stigmas that are associated
with the mentally ill and the effects that stigma can have on this population
is very important when examining this subject. The various ways that
the law enforcement handles situations involving the mentally disordered
and their rate of reconviction after release from prison is very interesting
when considering the bias and discrimination that is frequently displayed
towards this population. Society often is concerned with the disorders
that are associated with violence in association with the “early/late” theory
of violence. An intriguing aspect of stigma that has been researched
numerous times is the cultural and racial differences that affect the mentally
ill. Victimization of the mentally ill is a topic rarely recognized
because most of society underestimates its occurrence. People would
rather focus on the violence that the mentally ill enact rather than the
harassment that occurs to them. The causes of violence and the general
victims of assault have increased the interest of researchers throughout
the years. There are many misconceptions that are associated with this
topic which needs to be clarified so that society will not fear being attacked
by someone who is mentally handicapped. One last topic that intrigues
and initiates awareness are the children and mothers who commit violent acts,
especially murder. These acts draw the most attention because of the
rarity and unacceptable motives that are perceived with them. The topics
mentioned are reviewed thoroughly and the data for these studies support
the concept that the mentally ill are not as violent as many perceive.
General Stigma Concerning
the Mentally Ill
There are numerous stigmas
associated with being mentally ill. There is a tendency for people
to be wary and cautious when directly interacting with someone believed to
be “unstable.” The ignorance and naiveté of society has increased
the fear of being assaulted by a mentally ill individual. However,
numerous studies that have been implemented support society needs to learn
more about the mentally ill and understand that the myths posses are untrue.
The general public perspective about mentally ill persons
is that they are dangerous human beings with a desire to harm others.
Stuart and Arboleda-Florez (2001) chose to elaborate on this notion by developing
a study that analyzed the views that society has about the mentally ill.
They study included 1,151 randomly selected inmates who were interviewed
and diagnosed by a panel of psychiatrists. Subjects diagnosed with
antisocial personality disorder were asked to complete the Psychopathic Checklist.
This survey was given to ensure that a high ratio of axis II disorders would
not be acquired. Only the participants who received an extremely high
score on the survey were clinically diagnosed with antisocial personality
disorder. The results indicated that severe substance abuse was prevalent
when half of the violent crimes were committed, and that the prevalence
of psychotic disorders accounted for less than 1 percent of the offenses
committed by participants in the sample (Stuart & Arboleda-Florez, 2001).
It was suggested that the violent crimes committed by this selected population
contributed to one in every ten acts of violence as a result of an interaction
between substance abuse and mental illness. Thus it is rare for a
person to commit a deviant act solely because of a disorder. This
particular study supports the claim that society possesses a negative stigma
towards the mentally ill and that the fear possessed is greatly exaggerated.
The research supports the concept that the risk of being assaulted by a
mentally impaired person is low and that they are not primary contributors
to the crime that encompasses the world. Stuart and Arboleda-Florez
(2001) were able to explain that civilians are not the main targets for the
mentally ill who commit crimes, but rather close family members are more
likely to be victimized. Thus, it has been speculated that the media
is responsible for instilling these common fears against the mentally challenged
into society (Buckley, 2003). The media often broadcasts and amplifies
the crimes that are committed by the mentally ill.
Many people have the tendency to believe that the mentally
ill are responsible for much of the violence that plagues society.
The association between crime and mental illness has always been a vivid
image in the general public’s minds, yet studies have been conducted which
do not support this illustration. Teplin (1985) reviewed studies implemented
in the past which support the claim that mentally ill patients have an elevated
risk of being arrested, and the patients who were previous offenders had
a much higher risk of being rearrested. There was a lower risk for
the general public to be arrested than for the mentally ill. It was
asserted that the incredible increase of arrests were the result of the large
numbers of mentally ill offenders who were being admitted into hospitals.
Teplin (1985) speculated that mentally ill people are more likely to be arrested
than the general public because of the bias possessed by officers.
If a non-mentally disordered person was committing the same crime he may
be reprimanded rather than apprehended. Thus, the mentally ill are
considered to be more deviant because of their observable symptoms.
It has been concluded through previous studies that patients who were hospitalized
prior to the incident usually return to the hospital instead of being detained
in prison (Teplin, 1985). People who reside in state hospitals are
usually lower class citizens. This fact correlates with the supported
relationship between lower social class and crime. Teplin (1985) conducted
a study that required six people to observe the mentally ill in specified
police sectors of a city. The sectors ranged from extreme poverty to
affluent, with each observer recording the interactions among the police
and residents of these districts. This naturalistic experiment permitted
the observers to employ a symptoms checklist of the various mental disorders.
This experiment prohibited the use of clinical interviews and accurate diagnoses,
so the check list was greatly depended upon. A second validity test
was utilized to distinguish between people who were severely mentally ill
and those who were not. Prior to the study Teplin (1985) randomly
selected 61 prisoners who were diagnosed with a mental illness through observation
and the criteria described in the Diagnostic Interview Schedule. Teplin
(1985) observed this population for 5-10 minutes and then conducted a short
interview with the subject where a diagnosis was provided using the DIS.
By comparing the results of the observation and the interview there appeared
to be high correlation between the two sets of data. Teplin (1985)
believed that this valid measure would be applicable in the present study.
Observers were only allowed to make a list of the interactions that occurred
between citizens and police officers; however it was critical that the interaction
involved more than three verbal exchanges. It was estimated that 1,072
encounters occurred with 2,122 citizens being coded and monitored.
The rate of a mentally ill person encountering a police officer was relatively
rare. Only four percent of the subjects were coded as severely mentally
ill. They were more likely to be suspected of a deviant act and less
likely to be divulging an act of victimization. It was revealed that
the general public and the mentally ill will commit similar crimes as opposed
to the belief that the mentally ill are more violent. The concept
of the mentally ill being more violent than the average citizen was not
supported in regard to this study, however many fear this population because
of the portrayal by the media (Teplin, 1985). The mentally ill must
reside in the communities and interact with their neighbors, yet one should
not be overly cautious during an interaction. The support and aid from
police officers in the precinct allow the mentally ill to confide in them
and view them as a peer. Thus, the mentally ill are not considered
to be more dangerous than the average citizen.
Effect of Stigma on the Mentally Ill
Stigma can cause profound impairment to the
mentally ill. The feelings of shame and embarrassment that accompany
this population are indescribable. Many are constantly discriminated
against and held responsible for the development of their illness.
It is very important for this population to understand that they did not
cause their suffering, and that there are people willing to support them
through this difficult time.
The negative effect that stigma have on a person’s self-esteem
is disheartening and tragic. People with a mental illness begin to
feel inferior and worthless because of the negative image portrayed by society.
Link et al. (2001) was very interested in evaluating this specific subject.
Link et al. (2001) was aware of the damaging influence stigma can have on
a person’s confidence and wanted to ascertain how much of this deterioration
was the result of harmful stereotypes. Link et al. (2001) described
certain actions that can negatively affect a person, such as being rejected
from a job opportunity after disclosing about an illness. This discrimination
is common among people who are diagnosed as mentally unstable and they often
find it extremely difficult to be hired for a company. By evaluating
the research that was reviewed prior to this study, Link et al. (2001) assessed
how the media and social relations influence the way one thinks about mental
illness. It is most likely exhibited in a negative manner when the
apparent symptoms are portrayed rather than the core qualities of a person.
Thus, society has been conditioned to fear and be cautious when interacting
with someone identified as being mentally disordered. The person with
the illness realizes these false beliefs, yet lives in constant fear that
he will be rejected and isolated from society because of the impairment.
The fear of rejection and discrimination is more common among those who
have been hospitalized for a serious illness, as opposed to the people who
are diagnosed with a mild disorder. Link et al. (2001) described the
association between self-esteem and stigma as the self being responsible
for interpreting and responding to society’s reaction to stigma. The
study consisted of 88 randomly selected people involved in a clubhouse program.
Each member was assigned to a group that provided a program which taught
people various ways to cope with stigmas, or a group that did not provide
a program. The most prevalent diagnosis in the sample was schizophrenia,
with rates of bipolar and non-affective psychotic disorder closely following.
The stigma intervention course was given after a six-month assessment.
Link et al. (2001) used Rosenberg’s Scale to measure self-esteem, and each
participant was asked to answer each question with a: “strongly agree”, “agree”,
“disagree”, or “strongly disagree.” The perception of stigma was analyzed
with an instrument that allowed each subject to rate his feelings on certain
beliefs and statements that the public perceives as true about the mentally
ill. This instrument allowed the researcher to understand how strongly
the participants assumed that the general public would discriminate or treat
them differently because of the disorder (Link et al., 2001). The results
of the study revealed that a majority of the subjects had a high level of
self-esteem, and that a significantly small number of participants possess
low self-esteem. Results indicated that the subjects believe that the
psychiatric patients would receive the most discriminatory reactions by society;
and that people with a mental illness find it easier and less intimidating
to befriend another person with a disorder. The strong belief possessed
by the subjects is that the psychiatric patients will receive the most negative
stereotypes and will be rejected the most by society. Thus, the results
supported the idea that stigma is an influential factor in deciphering the
level of confidence of a mentally disordered person. Stigma can be
apparent in different forms, so it is very important for advocates to identify
each type to enact the proper mediation. Stigma can be detrimental
to someone who is mentally ill and this issue is should not be ignored.
Law Enforcement and the Mentally Ill
Many studies have been conducted
that support the likelihood of a mentally disordered person being arrested.
The rates of arrests for this population are disproportionately higher than
for the general public. Many researchers attribute these high ratios
to the negative stigma related to the mentally ill and violence. If
symptoms of a disorder are observable, the law enforcement will generally
arrest a mentally ill person and detain him for longer periods of time.
An important issue that is often discussed when addressing
the issue of stigmatization is the various ways that law enforcement manages
people with a mental handicap. Ashford (1988) was determined to test
how the law treated and judged repeat offenders who were diagnosed with
a mental illness. Ashford (1988) hypothesized that mentally ill criminals
were more likely than non-mentally disordered criminals to be imprisoned
for minor crimes. Ashford (1988) randomly selected groups of inmates
from the Maricopa County Jail System and reviewed their case histories and
criminal records. It is relevant to recognize that this particular
prison has a correctional psychiatric unit that has been acknowledged and
approved by the American Psychiatric Association. Ashford (1988) described
how the division provides various treatment services to this deviant population.
These include a crisis intervention component, an outpatient component,
an in-patient component and a treatment component. Each inmate was
categorized by their mental illness and whether they were recidivists.
The study indicated that mentally ill offenders were more likely to engage
in minor acts of crime. The results of the study support the claim
that repeat criminals who suffer from a mental illness committed more minor
crimes and were more likely to be charged with these violations than non-mentally
ill recidivists. The findings displayed a statistical significance
among the mentally ill and non-mentally offender in regard to violence.
It is more likely for a mentally ill recidivist to commit an act of theft
rather than an aggressive act. This supports the idea that mentally
ill people are not as violent as society would like to believe. It
is important to acknowledge that mentally ill recidivists may be required
to participate in different programs and seminars before being released
into the community (Ashford, 1988). With the aid of directors and
administrators of these various curriculums, other institutes should be
established that would help rehabilitate and counsel the mentally ill recidivists.
This would solve several problems plaguing the mentally ill because many
of them do not have the proper support and guidance from family members
or their community.
of Reconviction after Release from Prison
been few studies that examine the mentally ill after they have been discharged
from prison, and the different ways that detainment has affected them.
The desire to learn about the ways law enforcement copes with situations
involving the mentally ill has become increasingly more appealing.
Researchers find it interesting to evaluate and report the well being of
mentally ill offenders once they have been released from custody.
Certain stigma believes that people who suffer from
a disorder will continue to commit acts of crime once released from prison
or an institution. Steels et al. (1998) reviewed the lives of mentally
ill and psychotic offenders after they had been released from prison.
Archival evidence revealed that people diagnosed with schizophrenia have
a more positive occupational and psychiatric adjustment to life, as opposed
to those diagnosed with antisocial personalities who thrive in familial
and residential environments. One of the most interesting findings
among people with psychotic disorder is their likelihood to be convicted
of another crime after release from an institution. The study consisted
of 184 subjects who were released from prison with a restriction order.
There were 75 men and 20 women psychotic disordered subjects, and 70 men
and 19 women diagnosed as mentally ill. Restriction classifies anyone
who is considered to be dangerous to society and is monitored regularly by
clinicians and law officials. The measure used for this study was
a follow-up questionnaire which rated employment and relationship status.
Files were reviewed to gain knowledge about the past convictions, diagnoses
and mortality rates. Results specified that men and women with PD were
younger than the MI subjects when first admitted into an institution.
The PD women had a longer history of hospitalization than the women with
a mental illness. People with a psychotic disorder were more likely
to have committed a past offense, and a majority of men with PD had served
previous time in prison. Attempted murder and homicide were the most
common crimes for men with a mental illness, while PD men were more prone
to crimes of sexuality and violence. However, women with PD were more
likely to have committed crimes of arson while women with a mental disorder
were prone to acts of homicide or attempted murder. Mortality differed
between the two groups as well, for more people with a mental illness died
after release from prison than those with psychotic disorder. Steels
et al. (1998) hypothesized that this factor was a result of the difference
in ages and adaptability between the two groups. The mentally ill
tended to be older and were expected to commit suicide more frequently.
Results indicated that that people with a psychotic disorder were more likely
to commit more offenses and be convicted of more charges than the group with
a mental illness. In relation to forming and acquiring adequate relationships
and occupations, results revealed that men with PD were much more successful
than the men with a mental illness. However, only five men in the
PD group reported not committing any crime within this time period.
The study was able to support the original hypothesis that people with a
psychotic disorder were likely to adapt more successfully to social situations,
yet were more prone to re-conviction than those diagnosed with a mental
illness. A person suffering with a mental illness is more likely to
have a difficult time adjusting to the world in terms of social relationships.
The mentally ill person will need more treatment and support during his
release into the community. The mentally ill can do little to aid
and increase their lack of social functioning, but the psychotic disordered
subjects can deter from their deviant behavior by controlling their impulses
and aggression (Steels et al., 1998). The theory of restriction may
not be as successful as previously thought because it did not prevent PD
subjects from recommitting offenses. Thus, there is an observable
comparison that can be derived between people with psychotic disorders and
people with a mental illness. It is important for people in law enforcement
to understand and acknowledge these differences when interacting with this
population, especially when someone is released from prison.
Common Disorders Associated with Violence
Although it has been previously
stated that many individuals who commit non-violent offenses have a diagnosis
of more than one disorder, the most common pair is psychotic disorder accompanied
by substance abuse (Munetz et al., 2001). With this being the most
prevalent combination many psychologists and psychiatrists have chosen to
research this topic in association with the dramatic increase of mentally
disordered people becoming incarcerated. These topics have been reviewed
in conjunction with the decrease of people institutionalized.
There have been numerous studies and researches conducted
that examine which mental illnesses generally afflict an offender.
The three most prevalent disorders are antisocial personality, schizophrenia
and substance abuse. Dietz (1992) described various cases of mentally
ill people who were the perpetrators of unique crimes. In the first
occurrence, Dietz (1992) explained in great depth the reasons for people
with psychotic symptoms to submit to the demands of their illness.
Dietz (1992) claimed that people who suffer from delusions, especially persecutory
delusions, will perform deviant acts to protect themselves from the perceived
harm. They will assail before the “Devil” has an opportunity to attack
and execute them. Dietz (1992) continued to illustrate how people who
suffer from hallucinations tend to perpetrate crimes of violence, although
these are less frequent. With these symptoms in mind it is relevant
to understand that people inflicted with these psychotic characteristics
can be accepted and labeled as insane (Dietz, 1992). In the second
scenario expressed, Dietz assessed that a primary reason people harm others
is to indulge in specific uncontrollable desires. The article defends
the idea that a mental illness does not impair a person’s judgment, but rather
it motivates the person to indulge in these unacceptable pleasures.
Someone who is constantly being bothered by irrational urges and is unable
to control these inner yearnings will resort to the most radical stress relieving
activities. Dietz (1992) realizes that there is a discrepancy concerning
how much control offenders possess over their actions. The article
speculates as to whether a person commits the deviant act to suppress the
inappropriate desires, or if the desires are able to dominate the individual.
One of the last instances discussed is the influence that personality disorder
has on crime. Dietz (1992) believes that personality disorders are
strongly correlated with crime if they are accompanied by other disorders,
such as substance abuse or depression. The environmental conditions
that surround a person have strongly been linked to the development of antisocial
personality disorder, which enables a person to possess a low level of fear
arousal. Dietz (1992) continued to give examples of other personality
disorders and the crimes that are most often linked to them such as: the
paranoid personality and the likelihood of committing hate crimes with the
use of eclectic warlike weapons, the narcissistic personality is most likely
to be associated with credit fraud, and the possibility that the histrionic
personality will frequently accuse innocent people of sexual crimes and theft.
The article provides the average civilian with insight into the inner minds
of a mentally ill offender and the reasons for the mentally handicapped to
commit crimes. It has been suggested that people who suffer from psychotic
symptoms can be regarded as “insane”, yet it is rare for criminals to be
assumed this label if they have been diagnosed with a personality disorder,
or if they act on “uncontrollable” impulses.
The concept of someone intentionally harming another
human being for their own pleasure appalls most of society. Some of
the most feared crimes consist of sexual assault and sadistic rituals.
Holt et al. (1999) proposed a strong correlation between sadism/psychopathy
and sexually/violent offenders. The research supported the theory that
half of all psychopaths reacted and motivated by a sadomasochism response
(Holt et al., 1999). The hypothesis was primarily interested in discovering
if there was an underlying sadistic motivation between psychotic sexual
and violent offenders. This was compared to the population of men
who had committed the same crimes but were classified as non-psychotic.
Holt et al. (1999) hypothesized that there would be significantly higher
sadistic scores for the psychopaths than for the non-psychopathic offenders.
Holt et al. (1999) chose one hundred random files from a prison in California,
but only forty-one of the prisoners were able to participate due to various
reasons. The participants were grouped as being violent or sexually
abusive, depending on the nature of the crimes they had committed.
Each subject was interviewed and coded for psychopathy. After a thorough
review of each file which included, psychological evaluations, social histories
and clinical interviews, it was assessed whether sadism had influenced the
individual. Results from the study illustrated that there was no difference
between people who perform sexually violent acts and those people who commit
violent offenses. The assumption that there would be an interaction
between the type of felony and the different levels of psychopathy was not
supported. However, the study was able to support the findings that
there is a positive correlation between psychopathy and the various stages
of sadomasochism. This was shown to be significant across all measures
besides sexual sadism. A confounding variable of the study
was the limited number of participants in the study and its potential for
displaying the possible relationships that could exist between variables.
However the study was able to support past research that sadism is an associated
characteristic of psychopathy and that, “Psychopaths relate to others on
the basis of power and dominance, rather than affection” (Holt, 1999, p.31).
. Holt et al. (1999) believes that more research should be conducted
in this field of research.
"Early/Late" Start Theory of Violence
The positive correlation
between schizophrenia and violence has been a significant topic for many
researchers throughout the years. Many people have speculated whether
the stigma has been over exaggerated, and if this negative attitude that
has encompassed society can be waned with adequate care. The “early/late”
start theory suggests that people with a disorder will either become violent
early in life, such as childhood, or later in life as a result of the disorder.
The “early” starters are assumed to have had conduct disorder which results
in a history of oppositional behavior. The “late” starters react negatively
to an incident that occurs because of their disorder and do not have a history
of being hostile.
There have been numerous assumptions regarding the differences
between people with schizophrenia who commit crimes early in life, as opposed
to those who become deviant years later. Tengstrom et al. (2001) performed
a study that evaluated this concept. The research gathered claimed
that adults who were diagnosed with a severe mental disorder committed more
crimes and acts of violence than people who did not develop a disorder (Tengstrom,
2001). It has been examined through archival research that people
who suffer from schizophrenia are more likely to commit crimes but not necessarily
violent ones. This would discard the belief that is presumed by society
that people with schizophrenia are dangerous citizens who intentionally
harm innocent people. There has been a strong connection between the
risk of substance abuse and schizophrenia leading to more violence and crime,
which creates a more aggressive environment for the person suffering from
these illnesses. The researchers hypothesized that there are two groups
of people, the “early” and “late” starters, which would explain an association
between the disorder and the offenses committed. The “early” starters
began acting deviant in adolescence before there were any apparent symptoms,
while the “late” starters began acting offensively once the symptoms had
become prominent. It was hypothesized that men are more prone to be
“early” starters and for women to be “late” starters. The research
claimed that the “early” starters have been diagnosed with substance abuse,
tend to be inflicted with psychotic symptoms and are convicted of more crimes.
The study consisted of 272 men in Sweden who had been evaluated using a
pretrial psychiatric assessment after being accused of initiating a violent
act. Archival research had been implemented to aid the researchers
in their understanding of the “early/late” starter hypothesis. Files
were coded, reevaluations of the diagnoses of the subjects were achieved
and the term “violence” was redefined to connect this study with past analyses.
The article explained that violent crimes included murder/manslaughter,
assault and unlawful threats. Forceful crimes were described as murder/manslaughter,
assault, rape and armed robbery (Tengstrom et al., 2001). The results
of the test illustrated that there was a difference in criminal patterns
between the two groups of offenders. It was assessed that the “early”
starters had been convicted of more violent crimes and that they had been
hospitalized 2 years prior to the hospitalization of the “late” starters.
It had been revealed that one of the most significant similarities was the
troubling childhood of most of the subjects, but results displayed that the
“early” starters had a harsher time which clarified some of the reasons why
deviant acts were committed at a younger age. It was disclosed that
most of the subjects had been removed from their homes at a young age, yet
reasons differed between the groups. Deviant behavior was the most
significant reason why the “early” starters were removed from their families,
while the “late” starters were removed because of poor academia and cognitive
issues. The study presented the researchers with a glimpse of new treatment
programs that must be established to treat these men suffering with schizophrenia,
substance abuse, antisocial behavior, conduct, insufficient life and social
abilities (Tengstrom et al., 2001). Thus, the effects of the study
were able to support the hypothesis and research in the past because there
is a difference between the two groups of offenders. Although there
were a few similarities between the two, the differences were able to assist
the researchers in the convictions that there are major differences between
“early” and “late” start offenders.
Stigma of Mental
Illness across Culture and Race
can acquire much knowledge when culture and race are intensely studied and
evaluated. The cultural and racial differences that encompass society
allow many to understand how stigma can universally affect people.
The influence that stigma possesses over certain nations can be more detrimental
than ever imagined. By employing the different attitudes and behaviors
of diverse countries effective processes can be created that will permit
society to learn and understand the discrimination that is inflicted upon
One of the most appealing topics to researchers is the
stigma and cultural differences that affect the mentally ill. Xie
(2000) chose to study the Japanese population in regards to the gender differences
of mentally ill offenders. The study consisted of 2,094 mentally disordered
criminals residing in Tokyo. The subjects were assessed and grouped
into three different categories according to the crime they had committed.
Only the most serious crime was considered if participants had been arrested
for numerous charges. The three categories were: crimes against persons,
crimes against property and other crimes. The “other crimes” category
included traffic violations and possession of illegal substances.
Each offender was also diagnosed and assigned into separate divisions of
mental illness. These groups consisted of psychoses, major depression,
substance abuse and other mental illnesses. The results indicated
that mentally disordered males were less likely to commit crimes against
other people, as compared to the population of non-mentally disordered offenders.
In regard to the assault of an individual, males were more likely to attack
a stranger in comparison to the women who would assault a family member.
There was a significant difference among the suicide attempts for females
and males. The females had a higher occurrence of suicide attempts
preceding a homicide than the males (Xie, 2000). Results indicated
that the women in the sample were more prone to depressive disorders, had
a small substance abuse problem, attacked more family members and tried to
commit suicide more frequently as opposed to the men in the study.
Women were less likely to have had a previous criminal record before their
offense. The most common diagnosis for the entire sample was acute
psychosis. The men in the sample tended to have a higher deficiency
in prognosis because they came from a less supportive and financially unstable
upbringing. A majority of the participants were considered to be Not
Criminally Responsible, which accounted for an enormous women participant
population. This high ratio occurred because the diagnosis of antisocial
personality disorder is not considered to be an adequate excuse for the reason
crimes are committed. Many men were excluded from this particular study
which resulted in confounding variables. Domestic violence is not acknowledged
in the Japanese culture, which means that women are forced to remain with
their husbands in order to maintain the family’s pride and dignity.
The wives of these abusive men remain silent in order to preserve their name.
One of the most interesting findings was that Japanese women kill their children
more frequently than any other culture. A child is considered to be
part of the woman, when she attempts to kill herself she also kills her child
so that part of her will not continue to live. She kills the child
to ensure that no part of her is left behind to flourish (Xie, 2000).
One last prevalent difference between Japan and other countries is the disgrace
associated with mental illness. Many families keep their relatives
secretly locked away because of the harsh stigma that accompany the minds
of Japanese society. It is only when the illness causes a serious consequence
that the disordered family member receives the proper intervention and assessment.
There needs to be many studies conducted to evaluate the differences in gender
among the mentally ill. This will allow for a much stronger correlation
to be observed and accountable. There should be other culture
differences measured so people from other nations can compare and contrast
the stigma and aspects of other societies.
of mental health that has fascinated many is the effect certain stigmas
and illnesses have on minorities. There has only been a small amount
of research completed that examines this issue. Ford (2002) conducted
a study that correlated the relationship between violence and trauma among
African American women. The study was interested in observing the welfare
of women diagnosed with a severe mental illness and their reactions to traumatic
events. It has been estimated that about fifty percent of women diagnosed
with dual disorders have been subjected to a traumatic experience.
The archival research conducted prior to the study revealed that the environments
and living situations of African American women enable them to be more likely
to experience traumatic events. These women having been exposed to
a traumatic event are more susceptible to develop a negative psychosis.
One of the most common disorders linked to traumatic events is Post-Traumatic
Stress Disorder, which normally develops in women who have been sexually
assaulted or violently raped. The symptoms of PTSD appear almost immediately
after exposure to the traumatic instance. Ford (2002) performed the
study employing patients from an outpatient clinic in western Pennsylvania.
Fifty-five African American women were chosen to participate in the study,
with each having received mental health care for at least two months.
The subjects were interviewed over an 8-month time span and a review of
their files was assessed to obtain the correct information regarding their
illness. The Post-Traumatic Diagnostic Scale was used to measure the
rate of violence and trauma each woman had experienced. The Medical
Outcomes Survey was utilized to measure the well being and functioning of
each individual. Results indicated that on average, the women had
experienced about three traumatic events in their lifetime. The struggles
with various mental illnesses were the consequences of these experiences.
It was presumed that the mental illnesses moderately interacted with everyday
life; however they did not appear to have a poor level of functioning.
The general well being of the women appeared to decline as exposure to traumatic
events intensified. This would suggest that exposure to certain traumatic
events would be extremely harmful to the victim in numerous ways. There
are a larger number of women who are extremely vulnerable to victimization
because of their mental illness. They are perceived as weaker and less
likely to report an act of assault. The act of violence that is perpetrated
against these women permits their illness to become more critical and create
problems in their daily functioning.
Return to Top
Victimization of the
Many people underestimate the amount of abuse
that is directed towards the mentally ill. It is common for people
to believe that the mentally ill are more likely to victimize than be victimized.
The mentally ill feel intimidated and threatened by law officials when they
disclose a personal attack. They fear being judged and blamed for
their assault, which would produce a lower level of self confidence.
This timidity results in many cases of abuse being unreported and not acknowledged
by the victim. The victims often believe that they had instigated
their assault and that they deserve the abuse because of their mental impairment.
One of the major misconceptions among the general public
is that mentally ill people are always the offender and never the victim.
There have been numerous studies that evaluate the belief that mentally
ill people are never victimized. Many people are astonished to learn
that victimization among the mentally ill is frequent. Marley and
Buila (2001) became involved in a study that measured the assault of a person
who was mentally disordered. Research conducted prior to the study
concluded that people diagnosed with schizophrenia are most likely to be
assaulted by civilians. It is common for the mentally ill to remain
quiet after a violation has occurred because they fear that no one will believe
them. They fear that law officials will assume they are lying or hallucinating.
There has been research conducted that corresponds with the belief that
mentally ill people are violent. This only supports the idea that
aggressive people have a long history of being violent. If a person
is going to assault someone it would be a common happening and not a random
incident. Marley and Buila (2001) were interested in reviewing the
victimization of those suffering from schizophrenia, bipolar and schizoaffective
disorders. The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill and the National
Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Affective Disorders were contacted,
and with their help Marley and Buila (2001) were able to survey 265 individuals.
The survey contained three parts. The first part was concerned with
personal information about the individual and the disorder, the second consisted
of assessing whether the subject had been a victim and the third was interested
in their most traumatic assault. The findings of the study explained
that women were more likely to have been the victims of sexual attacks, while
men were more prone to have experienced robberies or muggings. Over
half of the population surveyed revealed that they had known the offender
of their traumatic attack. Most of the women in the study reported
rape to be the crime that they feared the most, while men reported being
the most wary of violent assault. The most traumatic experience was
reported to have occurred to women numerous times, while the incident only
occurred once to men. The study concluded that there is a higher ratio
of female victims because of their perceived vulnerability. Many people
depict mentally ill women as being weak and highly dependent on others.
They are assaulted more frequently because they are believed to be more passive
and desire affection. This rationalization accounts for many of their
assailants to conclude that women will do anything for the attention and
love that is absent from their lives. It was revealed that the more
severe the disorder the higher the likelihood that the violent incident will
occur. The most disheartening fact is that most of the abuse that occurred
was perpetrated by a relative or a family friend. This disintegrates
the trust and support that is needed during these hard times. There
is a constant need for services and care that family members need to provide.
Society needs to be aware of the harmful issues that many mentally ill people
endure, especially the ones that can cause permanent damage to the self-confidence
of a person (Marley & Buila, 2001). Services need to be provided
for the victims of these atrocious acts so they know that they need to report
any acts of personal harm. Law officials need to become conscious to
the truth that majorities of mentally ill people are assaulted and that they
need help and support to overcome these traumas.
Causes of Violence and Its Victims
The misconception of the causes of violence
and who are most likely to be victimized is prevalent among society.
Many fear that random strangers will be accosted and that violence will
erupt with no plausible cause. The limited number of crimes that
are related to the mentally ill have intrigued and stupefied society.
The universal theory that mentally ill people greatly contribute to the crime
in society, has relied upon the escalated rates of arrest and the detainment
of the mentally ill to inflate the actual number of crimes that are committed
by this population. There are many components that contribute to the
aggressiveness in a person. Thus every factor is not a result of the
mental disorder, for many people have a predisposition to be more hostile
It has been supported numerous times that substance
abuse, in accordance with a major mental disorder, is a high indicator of
aggression. Hiday et al. (2001) conducted a study that assessed the
causal factors which resulted in the violence among the mentally ill.
The archival researches displayed numerous causes for aggression.
Hiday et al. (2001) believed that the offender’s victimization produced
a violent effect in that particular individual. The elevated vulnerability
of being victimized by others can be an influential factor in explaining
the predisposed violence of some people. A predisposition to be hostile
in accordance with a substance abuse problem is another variable that could
motivate one to be violent. Poverty appeared to be a contributor to
the onset of aggression, regardless if a mental illness was present or not
in the individual. The constant observance to the acts of violence
in impoverished neighborhoods can function as a model for people who witness
it on a daily basis, some of these people may not be well educated and they
may not understand that violent behavior is socially unacceptable.
The study consisted of 331 severely mentally disordered participants who
were unwillingly admitted into a hospital. The subjects provided the
researchers with answer to the questionnaire concerning victimization and
their committed violent offenses. Interviews were held to assess the
severity and the development of the illness. This also included their
functioning capability. The results revealed that only a quarter of
the sample had experienced victimization within the last four months.
About half of the sample had been involved in a physical struggle or had
threatened to harm another individual. A majority of the sample who
were coded as aggressive had not caused injury to anyone and had not utilized
a weapon during the assault. An alarming concept that needs to be
addressed by mental health professionals is that a majority of sexual assaults
that occur to the mentally ill are never reported to law officials.
Many fear that they will be blamed for their abuse. There is an underreporting
within the general population but it is even more unnoticed in the mental
health field (Hiday et al., 2001). Results have supported the theory
that personal victimization will increase the likelihood of the victim becoming
violent, and the rate of violence appears to decrease with age. Thus
a young, victimized, mentally ill person is more likely to commit a violent
crime as opposed to an older, victimized, mentally ill person. Another
variable that could influence the aggressiveness of a person are the history
of violent acts. If a person has a tendency to be hostile there is a
higher risk that he may act violently in the future. The victims of
violent acts are most likely family members, friends or acquaintances.
Constant tension and enduring conflicts between a mentally ill individual
and a relative can increase the risk of violence, especially if there is
a history of aggression. The hypothesis that violence is a consequence
of victimization has been supported and many people now attribute this cause
to one of the many motivators of aggression.
There are many issues that are addressed concerning
the victims who are assaulted by the mentally ill. Much of the research
conducted and many beliefs of the public, suppose that innocent bystanders
are constantly in danger and are most likely to experience the wrath of
the mentally ill. Johnston and Taylor (2003) were determined to learn
more about the victims of the mentally disordered. By reviewing research
completed in the past, Johnston and Taylor (2003) were able to identify
that 75% of crimes committed against another person were performed against
someone that the offender knew. It is highly unlikely for a stranger
to be singled out when an attack is going to be committed. It is relevant
to declare that crimes executed by the mentally ill contribute to only a
small amount of the overall violence of society. Most of the violence
carried out does not result in permanent injury to the victim. The
participants in the study were 975 men and women who resided in a high security
hospital in England. They had been admitted to the hospital because
they were repeat offenders and perceived as dangerous towards other people.
Johnston and Taylor (2003) were able to obtain the clinical files of the
mentally ill from the hospital, as well as the files that contained their
criminal history and interviews administered while in the institution.
Using the data collected, the researchers were able to diagnose the offenders
and claim that schizophrenia and other delusional disorders were predominantly
manifested in the subjects. The researchers accounted for the characteristics
of the victim accosted. The categories consisted of an intimate, acquaintance,
authority figure, stranger or no victim detail. It was ascertained
that most of the victims had been female. Males were more likely to
assault strangers as opposed to women who frequently assaulted acquaintances.
Results specified that the two largest reasons for the assault were feelings
of jealousy and sexual motives. A startling fact was that people diagnosed
with mental retardation were more susceptible to victimize an acquaintance,
while the personality disordered offenders’ frequently accosted strangers.
There were a significant number of offenses in relation to substance abuse
that resulted with aggression in the victim, offender or both. In
support of the other studies conducted, it is important to assert that the
offenders did have a history of violence before being committed to the hospital.
This does not support the belief that a mentally ill person will randomly
become violent and accost anyone who threatens them. Homicide was
more prominent between the intimate and acquaintances, while sexual assaults
were the most frequent crimes committed against strangers. It was
affirmed that the offenders who committed homicide were more likely not
to have a history of violence, which made the researchers desire to learn
the motives of the murder. Offenders who have familial support tend
to have a more positive prognosis, for this motivates the patient to surpass
this stage in life and overcome the aggression (Johnston and Taylor, 2003).
It is suggested that if tension is among relatives, and if the mentally disordered
person has a history of violent behavior, it would be beneficial if the pair
was separated. This would grant the person the ability to overcome
the hostile feelings, and it could prevent an irrational act from occurring.
One of the
most disheartening and disturbing group of people in the world are the aggressive
children who murder an individual. Many stigmas affect these children
which often results in their deviant behavior. If a child hears that
he is “worthless” and “deviant”, he will most likely conform himself to
these stereotypes. Many people ignore the concept of young children
committing acts of homicide; for they would rather have the child imprisoned
instead of receive treatment.
Myers and Scott (1998) conducted a study that evaluated
the psychotic and conduct disorder symptoms of adolescents who have committed
murder. Through their research prior to the test Myers and Scott (1998)
ascertained that hostile and aggressive youths have witnessed more acts
of violence, have a genetic predisposition for developing certain disorders,
have a higher rate of abuse and are more neurologically imbalanced than
the non-aggressive population. Children are more prone to violence
if they regularly observe close family relatives interact with gang members.
They are at a higher risk if there is a low educational level within the
household. It has been estimated in the previous research that the
number of children who suffer from psychotic symptoms is rare, and that a
majority of the youngsters who commit murder are not responding to hallucinations
or delusions. The main purpose of the study was to evaluate two groups
of adolescents who had been diagnosed with conduct disorder, but who varied
in intensity and degree of violence. The study consisted of 18 male
adolescents who were diagnosed with conduct disorder, with a majority displaying
symptoms of schizophrenia during their initial evaluation. The control
group contained 15 boys who had been detained in a hospital for the past
two years. This particular group was also diagnosed with conduct disorder,
but was seeking treatment for their aggressive behavior. The procedure
for the study included diagnostic interviews, clinical interviews with physicians
and parents and a review of medical, school and criminal records of the participants.
Results indicated that 89% of the homicidal adolescents had experienced
psychotic symptoms, but only four had a history of delusions and hallucinations.
Every subject in the study was diagnosed with conduct disorder, with a majority
of the two groups being concurrently diagnosed with substance abuse.
There were no significant differences revealed between the two groups in
regard to history of abuse/family violence and medical history. Both
groups appeared to have learning disabilities, which resulted in academic
difficulties. The analysis was able to support the concept that there
is a major difference among juvenile homicide offenders and the non-homicidal
juveniles. Paranoid ideation appeared to be a main factor when evaluating
these two populations and it was revealed that the non-homicidal group had
never been involved in counseling. There is no precise explanation
as to the reasons these youths are more susceptible to psychotic symptoms,
yet the effects of environmental stressors could be assessed (Myers &
Scott, 1998). One of the most essential findings was that the control
group had a higher ratio of depression, but the juvenile murderers possessed
more psychotic symptoms. This discovery displays how affective disorders
were not responsible for the psychotic symptoms in the youths, which frequently
form the basis for symptoms. This study was able to display how there
are a large number of adolescents in society who need the help of mental
professionals. They are not given the support and the means to obtain
the aid which is needed. It is very important for the public to understand
that these offenses could have been prevented, yet they lack the encouragement
and the resources that will teach them how to control their hostility and
aggressive tendencies. It has been suggested that aggression accompanied
by a mental illness, abuse and a chemical imbalance result in violence.
These factors accounts for many crimes that have been committed by juveniles
suffering from psychotic symptoms.
against people who murder are some of the most common beliefs shared among
people. Society repeatedly has labeled people who kill as “deranged
psychopathic maniacs” who constantly desire to take another human life (Ewing,
2001). The murdering of a family member, especially a parent, is one
of the rarest crimes that can occur. The concept of a child killing
someone who was responsible for their birth ultimately bewilders many and
causes some to wonder what had motivated this tragic crime. Ewing (2001)
described parricide and how it appears to be one of the most explainable
offenses. It has been estimated that adolescents are the most likely
candidates to murder their parents, but numerous studies suggest that the
ages of those offenders can vary. A prevalent risk factor associated
with parricide is the rate and severity of abuse inflicted on a child.
A child will be motivated to kill a parent if he is continuously
abused and cannot suppress his anger. Ewing (2001) reviewed other factors
that can result in the killing of a parent such as, familial patterns of
violence, a child’s inability to cope with stress, alcohol abuse in the home
and the child’s failed attempts to seek help and be removed from the house.
A child who kills an abusive parent may offer a feeling of reprieve to the
other family members, and may experience pride for defending himself.
A common motivation for a child to kill a parent is if another member of
the family, especially a mother, desires the death of an abusive relative.
A majority of children who murder their fathers act to appease their mother
and to protect her from future harm. Emotional disturbance is the primary
mental illness that is diagnosed to those who commit parricide, yet a majority
of the youths are not seriously ill. Most do not suffer from psychotic
symptoms or antisocial personality disorder, but many of the children cannot
escape the hell that surrounds them. The limited numbers of youths
identified as being mentally ill are not diagnosed until after the killing,
and rarely a history of mental illness existed prior to the act. The
most common reason for murder is if the child has been a victim of severe
child abuse and has repressed his shameful thoughts. Occasionally a
child will murder his parents for economic reasons, but these instances are
rare and usually occur among an older cohort. This group consists of
people with antisocial personality disorder who have been abused. Ewing
(2001) describes step-parents are at the greatest risk of parricide because
of the potential conflicts that can arise between the adult and child.
The abusive parent is a prime target for many children. The risk of
parricide is increased if the death of a parent appears to be beneficial
to more than one family member (Ewing, 2001). There have been limited
studies conducted on this topic. Society would benefit by understanding
and realizing the motives for parricide. There is never an excuse for
murder, unless an innocent life is threatened and the perpetrator is killed
out of self defense.
The stigmas that affect mentally ill mothers
who kill are universally the most harmful and the most widely held.
People immediately assume that a woman is “deranged” and is not suitable to
be a mother. The reaction of society is universal and many believe that
the mother should lose her life if she takes the life of a child. However,
not all of the mothers who commit murder are insane and a majority of them
are excellent parents. The stresses that accompany one’s life, especially
someone who is mentally ill, may trigger a negative response. Thus,
it is the researcher’s responsibility to assess the various motives and influences
that cause a mother to kill.
The media has a tendency to over-publicize the murders
committed by mothers. The concept of a mother taking the life of a
child horrifies and angers a majority of the public. Dobson and Sales
(2000) recorded how the English court system is more lenient towards mothers
who murder as opposed to fathers. Fathers have reportedly been executed
and sentenced to life in prison, while mothers are more likely to be admitted
to a hospital and ordered to serve less time in penitentiary. Many
people throughout the world assume that mothers who commit infanticide are
mentally disturbed, and that fathers who commit the same crime are just deviant
and “evil.” Dobson and Sales (2000) reviewed a study that evaluated
the motives of mothers who murdered their children. Most of the mothers
had been diagnosed with psychosis or severe depression. The mothers
had committed neonaticide or filicide. Neonaticide is described as
the killing of an infant within the first 24-hours of its birth, while filicide
is defined as the killing of an infant after the first postnatal day.
Most of the infants, who were born within a 24-hour period, were unwanted
by their mothers. Over half of the infants who were more than a day
old, were killed to save them from potential harm or suffering. A
quarter of the sample indicated that the mothers had been deemed psychotic
at the time of the murder, with most of them suffering from delusions and
hallucinations. There was a significant difference between the mothers
diagnosed and treated prior to their criminal act. A majority of the
filicide women had been treated and hospitalized for their disorder, as
opposed to only a limited number who had not been diagnosed and considered
psychotic prior to their detainment. Many of the women feared rejection
from immediate relatives, and denied that they had been bearing a child.
The reason abortion was not considered was because most of them did not believe
that they were pregnant until the birth of the child (Dobson & Sales,
2000). The filicide women believed that the only way to “save” their
child was to sacrifice them and allow God to take care of them. Many
of the women were mentally ill and sought treatment in the past for their
symptoms. Dobson and Sales (2000) revealed that motivation and influence
to commit this crime is correlated with a difficult childbirth. The
predicament with blaming childbirth as a major cause for the murders is
that a majority of the general public may begin to believe that anyone is
at risk for this deviant behavior. Childbirth is not solely linked
to murder, but it can act in association with other variables and predispositions
that increase the vulnerability of these women. The differences between
postpartum blues, postpartum depression, and postpartum psychosis are described
to differentiate between them. The most common form is postpartum blues,
which consists of crying, anxiety and mood fluctuations. Postpartum
blues lasts for less than 2 weeks and there are reasons to acknowledge the
rarity of this disorder resulting in murder. A woman diagnosed with
postpartum depression is displaying the similar symptoms apparent in severe
depression. Someone suffering from postpartum depression will most
likely cope with the various symptoms for months before beginning to feel
“good” again. There is contradicting evidence that explains whether
the depression is developed because of childbirth, or if they are more exaggerated
as a result of the labor (Dobson & Sales, 2000). The rarest and
most severe disorder developed from childbirth is postpartum psychosis.
Women diagnosed with this disorder suffer from delusions and hallucinations.
Psychosis can be maintained for over a year after the child’s birth, which
leads many researchers to assume that many filicide deaths which occur after
a year can be associated with this disorder. The archival research
implemented by Dobson and Sales (2000) revealed that postpartum blues could
not be considered a motive for a child’s death. Childbirth should not
be thought as a traumatic experience which causes psychotic and dissociation
symptoms in mothers. The predisposition for mental illness in mothers
needs to be evaluated before any irrational conclusions can be created.
There should be precautions applied if a possibility exists that a mother
may develop a severe mental illness.
Return to Top
Numerous people within society
believe that mental illness is something that one should fear and look down
upon. Many are ashamed to associate with a mentally disordered person
because of the stigma that encompasses their lives and functioning.
Several of the studies reviewed have a consistent theme, which is to support
the mentally ill who are often misrepresented and misunderstood. The
common attitudes possessed by society deeply wound and lessen the self worth
of a person. The mentally ill begin to feel inferior and incompatible
with the rest of humanity. The shame and guilt incessantly perceived
by the mentally ill results in a vulnerability that can lead to their victimization
and learned helplessness. One of the most important aspects of every
study was the emphasis placed on various programs and seminars that should
be offered to both the mentally ill and the public. People have a
tendency to trust everything that the media presents, when in hindsight
this source is flawed. The media patronizes and exaggerates mental
illness, especially in relation to crime and violence. Most disordered
people will not commit a crime and if they do there are numerous other variables
that have contributed to the deviance. Blame cannot be solely placed
upon mental illness because it adheres to the media’s influence and does
not consider the other important factors that need assessment.
Many different people are labeled with a mental disorder
before an actual diagnosis is provided. Society judges a person instantaneously
when a mental illness is revealed. People become more cautious and
cease interaction with a person for the fear of being assaulted. Some
people believe that a disorder is contagious and will avoid the mentally
ill for fear of contracting the “disease.” The negative attitudes and
beliefs possessed by society are detrimental to everyone who is personally
associated with someone who is mentally ill. The harmful effects can
dehumanize a parent or spouse, and generate feelings of blame and hopelessness.
Mental disorders can be treated effectively if the proper medication and
counseling services are provided to the patients. These services have
proven to be beneficial to both the patient and family members who are battling
with the disorder and the discrimination from others. The naiveté
acquired by the public in regard to mental illness is apparent and universal.
Many cultures are very unsupportive and ashamed to associate with the mentally
ill, as observed in the studied reviewed. This universal position
regarding mental disorders needs to be accurately assessed and reevaluated
so that the public can understand that the mentally ill are not very different
from the rest of the population, and that they deserve the same opportunities
as everyone else.
Other topics concerning mental illness could have been
evaluated. A common disorder not examined was borderline personality
disorder. This specific illness has been associated with violence
and crime, for the impulsivity that is a common symptom can result in harmful
consequences. The rate which senior citizens and fathers commit violent
acts could have been reviewed closely so that the stigma associated with
this population could have been acknowledged. People may attribute
the murders executed by the elderly with Alzheimer’s disease or other forms
of dementia. The role of gender could have been evaluated to distinguish
between the types of disorders and the various effects of stigma. One
last topic that may have been addressed is the identification of various
assassins and their diagnosis of mental illness. It would have been
interesting to view the infamous murderers from history to discern whether
mental illness was attributed to their actions.
The concept that crime is the consequence of mental
illness must be eliminated. There has been numerous research implemented
that support the claim that various variables interact which result in the
criminal behavior. Only a small number of crimes are implemented by
the mentally ill, and that most of the crimes are preventable and predictable
(Gilligan, 1996). The countless factors that account in violence behavior
are apparent in most individuals. If poverty, aggressive tendencies,
feelings of shame and the inadequate feelings of self-worth all can result
in violent behavior. It should be emphasized that mentally ill people
are not psychopaths who yearn to submit to various sadistic impulses.
The negative image that society has on the mentally ill is pessimistic and
disheartening. The inaccurate and mythical representations that many
have about this population needs to be elucidated so that people can realize
that there is nothing to fear. The studies described yearn to identify
the major causes for this collective timidity. They were able to support
the assertion that the mentally ill are not more prone to crime than the
general public. Although some criminals are diagnosed with a disorder,
it was not the primary reason for the incident. This association that
is often influenced by the media and the personal constructs of people should
be reduced and recognized as a falsity.
The stigma that affects the mentally ill can be very
injurious to its victims because it reinforces their inferior images of themselves.
Many services should be established that advocate for the reduction of stigma.
Although it appears to be an unrealistic suggestion, it is imperative for
the public to understand that the mentally ill are not violent predators.
People should be sympathetic to those who commit crimes and do not realize
that they are in the wrong. There are so many people in the world
who need treatment and do not receive it. If society is able to acknowledge
this population and realize that they are lacking the social support to
conquer their diseases, stigma would drastically be diminished. It
is society’s responsibility to recognize and assist those who are alone
in their battle for dignity. If this issue is not identified then
the mentally ill will continue to adhere to the stigma and be isolated from
society. It is not appropriate for the mentally ill to blame themselves
for their abuses, and it is tragic to observe how the public instantaneously
absorbs everything the media conveys. The influence of the media is
so powerful that it will continue to affect the beliefs of the public until
proper knowledge is acquired concerning the mentally ill and their stigma.
Ashford, Jose B. (1988). Offense Characteristics
of Career Criminals with Severe
Mental Disorders. International Journal of Offender
Therapy and Comparative
Criminology, 32(2), 143-151.
Clark, Tom (2003). Debate of Mental Illness and Violence was Oversimplified.
Medical Association, 325.
Dietz, Park Elliot (1992). Mentally Disordered Offenders: Patterns
in the Relationship
Between Mental Disorder and Crime. Psychiatric
Clinics of North America,
Dobson, V., & Sales, B. (2000). The Science of Infanticide and
Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6(4), 1098-1112.
Ewing, Charles P. (2001). Clinical Assessment of Dangerousness: Empirical
Contributions. New York, NY: Cambridge University
Ford, Briggett C. (2002). Violence and Trauma: Predicting the Impact
on the Well-Being
Of African American Women with Severe Mental Illness.
Violence and Victims,
Gilligan, James (1996). Violence. New York, NY: Random House
Hiday, V.A., Swanson, J.W., Swartz, M.S., Borum, M., & Wagner, H.R.,
Victimization: A Link between Mental Illness and Violence.
Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 24(6), 559-572.
Hodgins, S., & Lalonde, N. (1999). Historical and Geographical
Psychopathology. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates
Holt, S.E., Meloy, J.R., & Strack, S. (1999). Sadism and Psychopathology
And Sexually Violent Offenders. Academy of Psychiatry
Law, 27(1), 23-32.
Johnston, I., & Taylor, P.J., (2003). Mental Disorder and Serious
Victims. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 64(7),
Link, B.G., Struening, E.L., Neese-Tood, S., Asmussen, S., & Phelan,
The Consequences of Stigma for the Self-Esteem of People
Illness. Psychiatric Services, 52(12), 1621-1626.
Lohman, Chad Irving (1997). Crime, Mental Disorders, and Public Perception.
DAI, 58(11B), 175.
Marley, J.A., & Buila, S. (2001). Crimes against People with
Mental Illness: Types,
Perpetrators and Influencing Factors. Social Work,
Myers, W.C., & Scott, K. (1998). Psychotic and Conduct Disorder
Symptoms in Juvenile
Murderers. Homicide Studies, 2(2), 160-175.
Steels, M., Roney, G., Larkin, E., Jones, P., Croudace, T., & Duggan,
Discharged from Special Hospital under Restrictions:
A Comparison of the
Fates of Psychopaths and the Mentally Ill. Criminal
Behavior and Mental Health,
Stuart, H.L., & Arboleda-Florez, J.E., (2001). A Public Health
Perspective on Violent
Offenses among Persons with Mental Illness. Psychiatric
Tengstrom, A., Hodgins, S., & Kullgren, G. (2001). Men with Schizophrenia
Behave Violently: The Usefulness of an Early Versus
Late Start Offender
Typology. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 27(2), 205-216.
Teplin, L.A., (1985). The Criminality of the Mentally Ill: A Deadly
American Journal of Psychiatry, 142(5), 593-598.
Wiener, Jerry M. (1999). Violence and Mental Illness in Adolescence.
IN R.L. Hendren
(Eds.). Disruptive Behavior Disorders in Children
and Adolescence (pp. 175-
189). Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Press.
Xie, Liya (2000). Gender Difference in Mentally Ill Offenders: A
Study. International Journal of Offender Therapy
and Comparative, 44(6),
NIMH Outreach Partnership Program
National Mental Health Association
SAMHSA's National Mental Health Info.
If you have
any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at: firstname.lastname@example.org