|
Hello 2012!
2012-01-02
The incredible speed with which time is passing by is just becoming faster with every year. As a child a single evening lasted forever while playing hide and seek. Now, unfortunately, one evening is only a matter of hours. The infinity of time is somehow disappearing and there is the time to face the realistic ‘what can I do’ in some period of time. As ridiculously as that might sound, time is becoming the quantity of the things you can do. One hour- a class, twelve coffees or twenty songs. As my teacher explained this incredible phenomenon, at the age of four, one year is the one fourth of your life. That is a long time. However, when the age of twenty or thirty is reached, one year is only the small part of your life. So it is, and it will become even smaller with every second. It would be great to slow down, but it cannot be done. Time is running away, going faster, there are less things you can do. That is somehow pessimistic view, yet, I believe it is true. Can someone stop the time?
Skomentuj [0]
igraszki con. 2011-10-20
MAKRELA (29-11-2007 20:40) ta sztuka musi byc przewidziana i z dobrym biznes planem, a nie tak od se, przypadkiem *** *** Alien (5-12-2007 19:13) *** Alien (6-12-2007 14:21) *** MAKRELA (27-01-2008 17:08) *** Ja (27-01-2008 17:16) zw, ide gotowac dalej *** igraszki. 2011-10-20
Ja (1-02-2008 20:36) ***
*** MAKRELA 20:17:25 *** MAKRELA (3-03-2008 21:42) *** MAKRELA (5-03-2008 15:12) *** MAKRELA (10-03-2008 20:38) *** MAKRELA (10-03-2008 20:51) *** Ja (12-03-2008 21:48) Ja (18-03-2008 18:26) *** Ja (18-03-2008 18:28) *** The analysis of the English legal system considering European Integration. 2011-06-05
The common law and the civil law are the two legal systems present in the European Union. Even though, most of the European countries operate within the civil law system England maintained the common law. Common law is the uncodified law that is based ‘on precedents set by the judges’ (Vago, 2009, p. 13), while civil law is based on the codified system where laws are introduced by the national parliament in order to regulate private relationships between individuals (Vago, 2009). Considering the integration of the European states it is important to determine what the advantages of the common law that allow England to sustain their distinctive legal system are. The exploration of this socio-legal phenomenon will be obtained through the evaluation of those legal systems in terms of the criminal procedure, predictability and efficiency. The results of the comparison will be used in order to determine whether there are some significant advantages that can be considered important for the coherent legal system in Europe. Also, after the analysis of the factors mentioned above it will be crucial to look at certain disadvantages that might conflict with the integration of European law. After determining the significant benefits and the issues involved with the maintenance of the common law system in England the conclusion will be made on the position of the English legal system in Europe. The first aspects that will be compared are the criminal procedures used by the two legal systems. Common law uses the adversarial system that gives both parties of dispute great autonomy in representing their case and the impartial judge has to determine the truth (Block, Parker, Vyborna, Dusek, 2000). The judge is not involved in the investigation as his responsibility is only to decide the verdict based on the evidence presented by the prosecution and the defense. The criminal procedure of the common law is requiring judges to stay objective. The inquisitorial system used within civil law obliges the judge to actively involve himself in the investigation. The study by Block, Parker, Vyborna and Dusek (2000) showed that the adversarial system has a higher success rate than the inquisitorial system in finding out the truth that is hidden by both parties of the dispute. That could be explained by the objective approach of the judge. As the information obtained by the judge is limited to the evidence presented by the two parties it might be easier to see the contradictions and logical flows of the data provided. In the inquisitorial system the judge is involved in the collecting of the evidence, which can make it harder to objectively look at the possible inconsistency in the facts presented by the defense and prosecution. On the other hand, the adversarial system failed to be as efficient as the inquisitorial system in finding out the hidden truth of the private parties (Block, Parker, Vyborna, Dusek, 2000). Yet again, the judge involved in the investigation is able to a have deeper understanding of the defense and prosecution, even though he might fail to observe the relation between both parties. Both criminal procedures seem to have advantages for different purposes. The issue of which procedure is better could be resolve by researching the success rate of convictions of the adversarial and inquisitorial system. Also, it might be useful to consider the combination of the two systems so that the advantages of both were cumulated in one coherent criminal procedure. As it is now, the civil law enables better perception of the individuals while the common law gives a better overview of the relations of the individuals involved in the dispute. Also, in terms of predictability the common law and civil law differ. The case law bounds the judge to make the decision based on the precedents. The verdict, therefore, would be the same as the one in an equal case. A number of trials with low complexity can be solved relatively simply through the application of precedents. That would result in the high predictability of a verdict in comparable cases. Judges might decide whether to apply the precedent or state that the case is different and create a new verdict. If the new verdict would be created, the future cases that are comparable would have to follow this verdict as the new precedent (Dainow, 1967). There is a continuity of judgment and, therefore, it should be concluded that the common law is very predictable. However, in the codified law the verdict is based on the written text and the interpretation of it by the judge. The codified general rules are the guidelines for the legal professionals who are supposed to fill in the gap by applying the written laws onto the individual cases (Dainow, 1967). The civil law does not require the case to be consulted with the previous comparable situations but uses the codes as the basis of the judgment. Therefore, the verdicts of the cases might vary as the judges can interpret the same law differently. The predictability of the decisions made in the civil law system is quite low. Both legal systems have a different approach towards cases that result in the varied level of coherency of the judgment. The importance of the predictability is that similar cases should be treated equally. It enables to avoid the situation where wealth or power could influence the judgment. The legal system that can be coherent with its decision enables more equality and fairness in the trial. Consequently, the common law has an advantage over the civil law in terms of predictability. [Rd1] Another concept of the civil and the common law that will be explored is the time efficiency. The concept of efficiency is highly connected to the criminal procedures and predictability discussed above. Common law is more successful at determining the hidden truth from both parties (Block, Parker, Vyborna, Dusek, 2000) and it is more predictable. As judges do not have to be involved in the investigation, the procedures are faster. Also, the ability of the judge to correctly discover the hidden facts shared by the defense and prosecution allows to clarify the conflict and make an appropriate judgment. As long as the defense and the prosecution provide necessary evidence the decision should be simple if there is a comparable case that can be used as the precedent. That would make the common law system efficient in terms of time consumption. On the other hand, civil law is concerned with the detailed investigation of the case by the judge and also the interpretation of the codified law. The procedures involved in those processes might be very complex and time consuming. Even though, individual cases receive more attention it is not efficient in terms of practicality. The issue of the long-term cases is that they are expensive and they make courts unavailable for the other trails that appear. It is hard to determine whether the extensive consideration of each case individually is more important than the availability of the court. Evidently, the decisions made by the court should not be rushed. However, the complicated procedures of the civil law unable the legal system to be quick and efficient. The pressure of trials waiting to be resolved might also influence the quality of the court’s judgment. Therefore, the common law has an advantage in terms of time efficiency. It is important now to take into consideration whether the advantages of the common law system could be integrated in the European law. Firstly, the problem that seems to emerge during the analysis of the common law is that it tries to simplify the cases in order to make the system more efficient. The judge is excluded from the investigation and that makes the judgment based the evidence that was provided by the prosecution and the defense. The lack of the judge’s involvement brings the risk of omitting some facts that might be crucial to the case. Therefore, notwithstanding that a judgment could be wrong it would still be set as the precedent for the other comparable cases. If the continuity of bad decision would be imposed on the international cases it could have critical results. European law is very focused on the rights of individuals and it would be unlikely to compromise those rights for the efficiency of the legal system. The importance of predictability and efficiency is lower than the consequences of the possible mistakes that can emerge due to the superficial analysis of the case. The advantages of the common law system, predictability and efficiency, are obtained through sacrifice of the direct involvement of the legal system into the dispute. The European legal system is more active in terms of control over citizens and,[Rd2] therefore it is doubtful that it will turn passive in that sense. That is the obstacle that would not allow the cases to be solved through the case law. The common law can work on the local scale. However, European law would not be able to integrate those ideas and maintain the same quality of the legal procedures. Those reasons seem to be valid enough in order to state that the advantages of the common law are rather unlikely to be implemented on the huge scale of European law. Conclusively, the advantages that result from the local approach of the case law are unlikely to have a potential to be used by the united legal system in Europe. Furthermore, the English law has to slowly give in to the codified system because of the pressure of European integration. Constitutional and Statutory law already is implemented as the separate system aside of common law. Therefore, England is facing a variety of legal structures that have a different purpose. Also, in 1967, Dainow (1967) observed the tendency of English legal system towards codifying their laws. He claims that there are already some ‘notable exceptions’ of codification that might suggest a change in the English legal system. The reason for that might be also the practicality of the civil law. The case law requires all the files to be stored in order to save the precedents that the verdict can be based on. As the cases are becoming more complicated, slight differences in the circumstances might produce new precedents that need to be stored. Therefore, the traditional legal system might prove to be insufficiently satisfying to the complexity of the current legal disputes. Especially, as the European regulation is imposed on all the countries of European Union, the conflicts that might emerge will have great variety. As the common law system is working efficiently for England, there might be a necessity to look for the restructuring the legal system in a way that could satisfy the needs of European integration and legal tradition. Finally, I would like to touch upon the theoretical perspective on the legal change of England under the pressure from the European Union. According to Weber (1978) the evolution of legal system leads towards the formal rationalization. English legal system is defined as substantive rationality and, therefore, it would be expected to formalize their laws. Civil law is an example of a very formalized rational legal system and can be considered as the example of the highest level of legal evolution. According to the study by Schwartz and Miller (1964) social complexity is the determining factor in the legal evolution. Therefore, even though England can maintain its common law legal system on the national scale, it would be unlikely after the integration with Europe. The social complexity would increase and it the case law would not be able to sustain the complications of the legal issues. That would imply that the natural step for England would be to transform from substantive legal system into the formal rationality that is represented by the civil law. Integration of Europe could lead to the increased social complexity that would require the codification of laws in order to maintain coherence and clarity of the legal system. To finish off, the theoretical approach of Weber and the study of Schwartz and Miller would suggest the shift of the common law system towards the codified civil law. To conclude, the common law system used by England showed some advantages that would not be able to be integrated in European system. Even though, predictability and efficiency of the common law proved to be higher than in civil law it could not be imposed on the European scale. The case law allows to maintain it’s quality due to the coherence of the system on the national level. Therefore, those advantages cannot be useful for the European law that has a great variety of legal procedures in different countries. Also, it seems like the English law is slowly proceeding with the codification of their laws in order to fit European standards. That is the shift from the substantive to formal law predicted by Weber’s theory of legal evolution. The common law is unable to satisfy the legal needs of growing social complexity that is the consequence of European integration. Furthermore, the legal system of England had to face the changes that occur in the increasing diversity of the legal disputes. The case law has to face new problems that cannot be solved in the basis of precedents. Therefore, there is a need for English legal system to shift from the uncodified common law towards the codification and eventually civil law. Work Cited: Block, M. K., Dusek, L., Parker, J. S., Vyborna, O. (2000). An experimental comparison of adversarial versus inquisitorial procedural regimes. American Law and Economics Review, 1 (2), 170-194. Dainow, J. (1967). The civil law and the common law: some points of comparison. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 15 (3), 419-435. Miller, J. C., & Schwartz, R. D. (1964). Legal evolution and societal complexity. The American Journal of Sociology, 70 (2), 159-169. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: an outline of interpretive sociology. Los Angeles: University of California Press. Vago, S. (2009). Law & society (9th edition). London: Pearson Education.
Should criminal offenders diagnosed with a psychopathic disorder qualify for the use of diminished responsibility according to the English legal syste 2011-06-05
In 2004, more than one out of ten criminal offenders admitted to mental hospitals in England and Wales were diagnosed with a psychopathic disorder; one fourth of these patients were convicted or charged with violent crimes (Foster &Ly, 2005). Considering that less than one percent of the general population shows psychopathic traits (Coid, Yang, Ullrich, Roberts, & Hare, 2009), a psychopathic disorder seems to be an important factor in the general crime rate. Therefore, it is important to understand the role of the English legal system in preventing crime involving individuals with psychopathic disorders. Psychopathic disorder is a popular academic topic that was investigated from multiple different perspectives. The relationship between a crime and psychopathy is well established among academia (eg. Hare& Neumann, 2010; Blai& Mitchell, 2005; Foster &Ly, 2005). Also, there are multiple psychological studies which identified certain characteristics of the psychopathic disorder including superficial charm, lack of empathy and impulsivity (eg. Hare& Neumann, 2010; Blair & Mitchell, 2005; Hare, 1999). The increasing knowledge about the human brains allowed to explore the issue of psychopathy from a scientific perspective. The findings suggest that there might be underlying biological cause of psychopathic disorder (Blair & Mitchell, 2005; Abbott, 2001). Following the increased understanding of psychopathy, there are attempts to understand the morality and responsibility for the crime committed by individuals with this disorder (Ciocchetti , 2003; Litton, 2008; Felthous, 2008; Herpertz& Sass, 2000). The ongoing debate generally tends not to assign full moral responsibility to criminal offenders suffering from psychopathy (Felthous, 2008, p. 392). The psychopathic disorder is well researched from the psychological, biological and philosophical perspective. However, despite the extensive analysis of the issue of psychopathy, there seems to be a lack of agreement on the legal responsibility of criminal offenders diagnosed with a psychopathic disorder. The legal responsibility of psychopaths is considered to be of “considerable debate and controversy” (Hare& Neumann, 2010, p. 18) even in recent studies (eg. Hare& Neumann, 2010; Litton, 2008). In order to clarify the ambiguity, firstly, the basic question of what psychopathy is needs to be answered. The English legal system uses The Mental Health Act definition of psychopathy, which states that a psychopathic disorder is a permanent disability of the mind that causes “abnormally aggressive” (Mental Health Act, 2007, p.57) behavior. This clinical definition, created by Hare (1991), established a set of characteristics that help to identify individuals with a psychopathic disorder. These definitions need to be checked in terms of their compatibility with each other in order to see whether the Mental Health Act definition is updated with current knowledge about psychopathy. Secondly, an integration of the clinical and legal definition is needed in order to establish coherent measures towards criminal offenders diagnosed with psychopathy. It has to be determined whether individuals with psychopathic disorders should have full legal responsibility for their actions. This would enable to verify the validity of the use of diminished responsibility by the defense of individuals diagnosed with psychopathy. Diminished responsibility is a defense technique that allows to change the charges of murder into manslaughter on the grounds of mental impairment (‘Manslaughter: diminished responsibility,’ 2010). The textual interpretation will be used in order to determine whether psychopathic disorder satisfies the requirements for the use of diminished responsibility. Therefore, the main concern of this paper will be whether criminal offenders diagnosed with a psychopathic disorder qualify for the use of diminished responsibility according to the English legal system. In order to do that, the basic legal procedures need to be checked in terms of their accuracy. If diminished responsibility would be applicable for criminal offenders with psychopathy, the legal system should revise its approach and look for alternative solutions to deal with this issue. There should be an outlook for the coherent measures towards psychopaths considering the scale of the problem. It is estimated that fifty percent of serious criminal offences were committed by psychopaths (Hare, 1991, p. 27). Due to the lack of available treatment for those individuals, they are sent to prisons instead of mental institutions. These procedures are only avoiding the issue rather than creating solutions that would decrease the number of crimes committed by psychopaths. Therefore, if criminal offenders with psychopathy qualify for the use of diminished responsibility it would be necessary to look for new solutions that would maintain the rights of psychopaths and protect society from criminal activities of those individuals. The difference between the legal and the clinical definition of psychopaty is crucial in understanding the issue of whether the English law is appropriately dealing with cases involving individuals with a psychopathic disorder. The English legal system’s determination of the right to claim diminished responsibility is based on the Mental Health Act of 1985 influenced by Prichard (1835). He created the concept of moral defects which would enable the prosecuted to claim the right to limited legal responsibility (Pitchard, 1835, p. 132). This broad concept was specified throughout the next years and resulted in the definition of psychopathy as a “disability of mind” (‘Mental Health Act’, 1983, p. 23) that leads to aggressive behavior. By 2007 the Mental Health Act abolished specific characterizations of personality disorders and collected all of them under the general concept of ‘mental disability’. The legal approach towards specific personality disorders is shifting from detailed descriptions to general concepts that need to be interpreted by the judge. On the other hand, instead of generalizing the concept of psychopathy, Hare (1991) identifies specific characteristics in order to classify psychopaths. He created the list ‘Psychopathy Checkilist’ in 1980 which was revised 10 years later. This list created a final, authorized version of how to measure and classify psychopathic disorders. Hare divided the list into two separate factors. The first one describes behavioral characteristics such as: superficial charm, manipulation, high self- esteem, lack of empathy, remorse or guilt, and failure to accept responsibility for their own actions (Hare, 1991, p. 53). This classification applies to the interpersonal relations of the psychopath. The second factor describes the social behaviors of individuals with psychopathy. These characteristics include: need for stimulation, impulsivity, irresponsibility and early behavior problems (Hare, 1991, p. 54-56). Based on the foundation set by Hare, further studies investigated the emotional and moral capabilities of psychopaths. Herpertz (2000) explained the lack of empathy in individuals with pyschopathy as weak prefrontal functioning of the brain (p. 580). Inability to read emotions seems to be the most concerning issue investigated by scientists. Also, Abbott (2001) looks into the brain deviations in psychopaths that could explain the decreased empathy abilities in those individuals. There exists evidence of the amygdale dysfunction (Abbott, 2001, p. 3) that is not allowing recognition of the feeling of anger or sadness in patients with a psychopathic disorder. These discoveries show how clinical definitions are becoming very detailed in describing the condition of psychopathy. Therefore, the clinical and legal definitions of psychopathy are drifting away from each other, which requires improvement. As the legal approach towards mental disabilities becomes more generalized, the clinical definition of psychopathy is facing more precise classifications. That causes a difficulty for the English legal system to address these cases appropriately. The Mental Health Act of 2007 excluded psychopathic disorder from the disorders that would qualify for the use of diminished responsibility. Considering the low integrity of the legal approach and new scientific discoveries regarding psychopathy, it is necessary to investigate whether this decision is correct. In principle, mental disabilities should qualify for use of decreased charges in homicide cases. It needs to be determined whether the current knowledge about psychopaths satisfies the requirements for diminished responsibility. Consequently, the crucial issue is whether psychopaths, as individuals that are rational but unable to experience empathy, should be able to claim decreased charges on the basis of mental illness. The main issue is the question of whether or not the definition of diminished responsibility provided by the Homicide Act of 1957 also applies to psychopathic disorders. The characteristics that allow for use of diminished responsibility according to the Homicide Act 1957 are as follows: abnormality of mind, biological cause of the abnormality, and impairment of mental responsibility (Homicide Act, 1957). The first requirement could be considered applicable for cases of psychopathy. The analysis of definitions of psychopathic disorder showed strong evidence for abnormality of mind. Canter (1995) looks at the historical changes of the way psychopaths are perceived in society. Despite slight differences, the notion of abnormality of mind remains constant (Canter, 1995). Also, the Mental Health Acts of 1985 and 2007 list psychopathic disorder as “disability of mind” (‘Mental Health Act’, 2007, p. ?).There is no confusion in the academic and the legal spheres in regards to the dysfunctional mind of psychopaths. Therefore, the first requirement of 1957 Homicide Act for diminished responsibility is satisfied. However, more problematic is the issue of whether psychopathic disorder is biologically caused. There is a study that showed that psychopaths have abnormality in the brain that is responsible for increased aggression and that they are unable to recognize emotions, thereby, to show empathy (Blair& Mitchell, 2005). Also, Abbott (2001) and Herpertz (2000) identified deviations in the brain that cause the inability of psychopaths to read emotions. Still, these discoveries do not imply a tendency to murder. The second factor should not be interpreted in terms of biological inclinations to murder. Dysfunctions such as depression or schizophrenia qualify for the use of diminished responsibility, even though these psychological diseases also do not imply homicide tendencies but the underlying biological cause of the abnormality. Therefore, for the psychopathic disorder there is strong evidence that the disability of mind is biologically caused (Blair& Mitchell, 2005; Abbott, 2001; Herpertz, 2000). The second requirement of the Homicide Act of 1957 should also be considered as satisfied in the case of psychopaths. Finally, the last requirement of impairment of mental responsibility is the most complex issue in the analysis of psychopaths. Studies of psychopaths have shown that, even though they are unable to recognize emotion and have an increased tendency to aggression, their mental capability of judging the right and wrong is not imapired (Blair& Mitchell, 2005; Felthous, 2008). Psychopaths are able to recognize morally sound decisions and still do not feel remorse or guilt for their wrongdoings (Blair& Mirchell, 2005, p. 45-48). Ciocchetti (2003) claims that, even though the psychopaths are members of a moral community, they fail to position themselves within this social scheme (p. 178-179). Despite the recognition of social norms and morals, individuals with psychopathic disorder are unable to feel remorse or guilt due to their disconnection with the moral community. Litton (2008) points out that in principle, psychopaths have no moral responsibility. They do not satisfy the requirements of a morally responsible person as in guided by ethical reasons or by rational self-governance (Litton, 2008, p. 392). Litton (2008) and Ciocchetti (2003) conclude that there is no moral responsibility to be assigned to individuals with psychopathic disorders. Therefore, the third requirement for the use of diminished responsibility is also satisfied. In terms of diminished responsibility, psychopaths qualify all of three requirements put forward by the Homicide Act of 1957. The first one, abnormality of mind, is certainly fulfilled; however, the other two create some ambiguity and controversies. Both characteristics, biological cause and the impairment of moral judgments, appear to some extent in individuals with psychopathic disorders. However, because there are multiple social concerns regarding the treatment of psychopaths, there are still doubts whether those factors are important and relevant enough to qualify for the requirements of diminished responsibility. The ‘inhuman image’ of psychopaths created by media is not allowing to look at the psychopathic disorder as a disease that requires treatment and help (Egger, 2002, p. 27). Also, because of the brutality of the crimes committed by psychopaths, society tends to have strong subjective and emotional responses to these cases. The punishment is considered to be the most satisfying and fair response to psychopaths charged with a homicide act according to social morality and standards (Kocsis, 2007, p. 13). The legal system acknowledges the influence of public opinion and avoids radical changes in the law. Those restrictions are limiting the possible improvements and development of the legal measures used in the criminal cases involving psychopaths. Diminished responsibility enables the criminal offender to be placed in mental institutions and to undergo treatment. However, there is no treatment invented for psychopathic disorders and, therefore, the placement of psychopaths in mental health institutions might prove to be ineffective and dangerous for other patients. The aggression of psychopaths makes it difficult to deal with those individuals in institutions less strict than prison. Despite those practical problems, it is still necessary to try to explore the condition of psychopathy and to develop treatments that would allow preventing crimes committed by these individuals (Abbott, 2001, p. 6). This can only be achieved through the legal and social acknowledgement of psychopathic disorders as a disease that requires professional medical help and not only punishment. To conclude, in principle, criminal offenders with psychopathic disorders should qualify for the use of diminished responsibility. The requirements of biologically caused disability of mind that impairs moral judgment are satisfied in the case of the individuals with a psychopathic disorder. However, the lack of integration into the legal definition of recent scientific findings regarding psychopathic disorders enables the development of inconsistent legal procedures in regard to criminal offenders diagnosed with psychopath. The Medical Health Act of 2007 excluded psychopathy as a disorder qualifying for diminished responsibility. That incoherency shows the major issue in the legal measures used in cases involving criminal offenders diagnosed with a psychopathic disorder. As no right for the use of diminished responsibility is given to criminal offenders with psychopathy, they are sent to prison where the solution of the issue of crimes committed by psychopaths is postponed. In result, these individuals are imprisoned instead of receiving appropriate medical treatment. Current lack of therapy does not justify the ignorance of the mental disability of patients with a psychopathic disorder. Psychopathy is recognized as a mental disability and should be treated as such in the legal sphere, however, in order to do so, there needs to be a social and a legal acknowledgement of psychopaths as individuals requiring medical help. The knowledge on psychopathy that is available at the moment has strong evidence to prove that ‘inhuman behavior’ is in fact a medical condition. The acknowledgement of this through enabling psychopaths to ask for diminished responsibility would be the first legal step towards a better understanding of human nature. This legal measure could allow for the creation of institutions where knowledge about psychopathy could be improved. The understanding of psychopathy seems to be crucial in determining the origins of crimes, and it could lead to more efficient prevention of criminal behavior. Therefore, psychopathic disorders should most certainly be qualified for the use of diminished responsibility not only because it is a mental disorder that disturbs moral decisions, but also because it has a potential to create better chances for crime prevention. Bibliography: Abbott, A. (2001). Into the mind of a killer. Nature, 410, 296-298. Blair, J. Blair, K. Mitchell, D. (2005). The Psychopath: emotion and the brain. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Canter, D. V. (1995). Criminal shadows: Inside the mind of serial killer. London: HarperCollins. Ciocchetti, C. (2003). The responsibility of the psychopathic offender. Philosophy, Psychiatry & Psychology, 10 (2), 175-183. Coid, J., Yang, M., Ullrich, S., Roberts, A., & Hare, R. D. (2009). Prevalence and correlates of psychopathic traits in the household population of Great Britain. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 32(2), 65-73. Egger, S. A. (1998). Killers among us: an examination of serial murder and its investigation. New York: Prentice Hall. Felthous, A. (2008). Psychopathy, diminished capacity and responsibility. The International Handbook of Psychopathic Disorders and Law: Laws and Policies, 2 (3). 123-131. Foster, S., Ly, L. (2005). Statistics of Mentally Disordered Offenders 2004. Retrieved March 15th, 2011, from http://www.nacro.org.uk/data/files/nacro-2005121602-19.pdf Hare, R. (1991). Without Conscience. New York: Guilford Press. Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. S. (2010). The role of antisociality in the psychopathy construct: Comment on Skeem and Cooke. Psychological Assessment, 22(2), 446-454. Herpertz, S. C. Sass, H. (2000). Emotional deficiency and psychopathy. Behavioral Sciences & Law, 18 (5), 567-580. Kocsis, R. N. (2007). Serial murder and the psychology of violent crimes. Boston: Humana Press. Litton, P. (2008). Responsibility status of the psychopath: on moral reasoning and rational self-governance. Rutgers Law Journal, 39 (349), 8-30. Manslaughter: diminished responsibility. (2010). Retrieved March 15th, 2011, from http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/manslaughter_diminished_responsibility/ Mental Health Act. (2007). Retrieved March 14th, 2011, from http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/12/schedule/2
The overview of the theories of drug addiction. 2011-01-16
The overview of the theories of drug addiction. The issue of drug addiction is a very complex scientific and social issue. Drugs used to be the inspiration of British romantic poets and the relaxation tool of the elite. The main problem is in what ways people are connected so that the reaction to the drugs is the same regardless of position and status of individual. It is important to discover the causes of drug addition and how it can be reversed. The understanding of the processes behind the addiction is crucial in order to solve one of the main problems of XXIst century. Theories divide their focus between the physiological addiction and the psychological addictions. The physiological addiction is caused by the physical symptoms of drug addiction that are occurring during withdrawal when the addict experiences distress and agitation after euphoria and relaxation that occurs while on drugs. The great cravenness for drugs is the psychological need that drives drug addiction and is the basis of the psychological addiction. The causation process and the importance of those two factors should be determined. There are few theories that focus on the issues mentioned above. Firstly, the theory that focuses mainly on the psychological causes of drug addiction would be based on the psychoanalytical approach. Hopper (1995) used Freudian ideas in order to develop his theory of drug addiction. Hopper’s theory defines causes of drug addiction as unconscious need for homosexual fantasies that allows to avoid taking responsibility for those thoughts. The drug use would subconsciously allow to avoid the act of masturbation as having homosexual fantasies would be replace by another intensive stimuli (Hopper, 1995). The psychoanalytical theory presented by Hopper seems to be very disappointing in terms of the actual explanation of the drug addiction process. The theory only names a factor that could lead to drug addiction. However, the possibility of proving or disproving Hopper’s theory is very unlikely. The unconscious thoughts that are suppose to be driving the need for drug addictions have not been proven. The positive reaction to the psychoanalytical treatment have been shown on few subjects (Hopper, 1995) which could suggest that assumptions could be right. However, there is variety of external factors that could cause psychoanalytical treatment to work. The time that passed decreased the need for drugs due to the lack of stimuli presence or drugs could be associated throughout the therapy with the unpleasant experiences. Although psychoanalytical theory cannot be disproven, it does not satisfy scientific standards. Also, another theory that tries to explain drug addiction takes behavioral approach with the focus on physiological part of addiction. It is crucial to access the importance of physiological changes on the body that influence the addiction. Wise introduced the ‘anhedonia hypothesis’ that was later studied by Di Chiara (1991). Anhedonia hypothesis claims that the use of drug releases dopamine transmitters in the brain which cause the association of the pleasurable experience with the drug usage (Di Chiara, 1991). The repetition of that behavior increases the motivation to obtain the stimuli which causes drug addiction (Di Chiara, 1991). The theory provided by Wise and Di Chiara is quite convincing in terms of the evidence provided and the logic of the process. It is quite likely that people experience the positive craving at the beginning of the addiction after associating drugs with euphoria. The exceptions and the later stages of addictions are challenging the theory. The hate-love relationship of drug addicts with the stimuli is very complex. It would be risky to conclude that the drugs are associated with pleasure the whole time as the addiction is usually followed by the number of unpleasant situations. Also, the necessity of diverse reactions to the drug addiction would have to be explained. The amount of drug used should determine the process of addiction as humans would undergo the same physiological reactions. Behavioral theory of drug addiction provides some physiological basis of the processes, however, it leaves a number of unanswered questions regarding addiction. Finally, the theory that combine both previous approaches is The Incentive-Sensitization Theory of Addiction by Robinson and Berridge. This theory states that the addictive drugs have the power to release dopamine transmitters that cause pleasurable experience (Robinson& Berridge, 1993). However, the difference is that the process responsible for the addiction is psychological need to continue the use of drug (Robinson& Berridge, 1993). Only after the repetitive behavior the dopamine is physiologically associated with pleasure. This biological association is conditioned and requires a fair amount of time to extinct. Still, after the recovery the reappearance of the drug as conditioned stimuli might release the unconditioned response in form of the strong motivation to get the pleasure through the use of conditioned stimuli- drugs (Robinson& Berridge, 1993). This theory successfully answers the main questions that the theories focused only on physiology or psychology failed to explain. Robinson and Berridge give explanation of the process in the very clear and logical way. To conclude, the process of addiction is best explained through the combination of biological and psychological knowledge. The first two theories could be concluded to use negative reinforcement as the technique. Unpleasant stimuli of remorse or discomfort is taken away if drugs are consumed. The last theory of Robinson and Berridge managed to combine the first psychological need for pleasurable experience, with the removal physiological discomfort that occurs later during the addiction. This theory establishes basis for further research on the topic of the drug addiction. Reference Di Chiara, G. (1999). Drug addiction as dopamine-dependent associative learning disorder. European Journal of Pharmacology 375, 13-30. Hopper, E. (1995). A psychoanalytical theory of 'drug addiction': Unconscious fantasies of homosexuality, compulsions and masturbation within the context of traumatogenic processes. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 76, 1121-1142 Robinson T. E., Berridge K. C. (1993) The neural basis for drug craving: an incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. Brain Res. Rev.18:247–291. Lack of security with the current policies of the United Nations. 2010-12-08
Lack of security with the current policies of the United Nations. The world is facing serious crisis around Korean Peninsula that could result in a world war. Unfortunately, the United Nations that are suppose to maintain peace are rather failing in their mission. Also, it should also be considered whether the measures used to maintain peace are morally correct. Forcing peace upon third parties seem to have the opposite outcome from the expected one. Individual lives are sacrificed in order to maintain peace. This is threatening to the less influential countries that might also be a victim of the United Nations decisions in future. The right to protect our countries’ security should be sacred. South Korea was denied those rights by the United Nations after South Korean Navy ship ‘Cheonan’ was sunk by North Korean torpedo on March 26th. The statement released by the United Nations asked South Korea for ‘the restraint’ and claimed to have ‘deep concern’ about the results of the report on Cheonan sinking. No serious steps were taken in order to prevent further acts of aggression. On 22nd of November North Korea fired shells very near South Korean border. The exchange of fire began. The tension between Koreas is increasing. There are number of causes why position of United Nations in this conflict can be considered hypocritical. Firstly, the soft policy of the United Nations towards aggression is not effective. The threat from the North Korean ambassador to the United Nations that military actions will follow if the United Nations will suggest North Korea involvement should have been a concern for the United Nations. Instead, the threat was accepted, and therefore, showed weakness of the security system. The lack support for South Korea from the international scene aimed to avoid any future confrontations by pleasing North Korea. However, no consequences of the violence encouraged North Korea to further actions. The recent fire exchange between Koreas is perfect proof of inefficiency of the measures taken by United Nations. South Korea’s security is not protected and neither is the world peace. The issue of whether the decision of the United Nations to not undergo any reaction to North Korean provocation is also a moral issue. The recent conflicts with North Korea cost South Korea 48 lives so far. Western society acknowledges the lives of individuals to be equally valuable. Therefore, what is the process that leads United Nations to believe that in order to maintain peace it is necessary to ignore those victims? If United Nations would blame North Korea for the Cheonan sinking there would be a risk of great number of lost lives. Then the issue is whether saving one person from fire should be a good reason to endanger lives of five fireman. The current policy direction of United Nations seem to be vague. The live of individual is the priority. The morality that Western world represents is contradictory to the United Nations decisions in the case of South Korea. Also, North Korea is the country that could require humanitarian intervention. The attack on Iraq by US forces was based on the assumption that Iraq possesses nuclear weapons. It is known that North Korea also is in possession of weapons of mass destruction. Furthermore, North Korean government is accused of breaking human rights. The United Nations are assisting the humanitarian intervention carried out in Iraq. That could lead to the conclusions that the rightfulness of intervention is strongly dependent on the decision of the United Nations. The people in North Korea are exposed to further breaking of human rights and are denied a rescue. To conclude, the United Nations is failing in fulfilling their mission as peace bringer. Korean Peninsula is the ticking bomb and the United Nations are not solving the problem. One of the possible causes is the vague and confusing morality that drives decisions of the United Nations lowering its credibility. The actions that are undertaken are based on the United Nations interpretation of their mission. This unfortunately varies in different cases. Individual countries are dependent on the United Nations decision making that proved to be insufficient in case of the Koreas. If this vague policy of the United Nations will continue it might be hard to feel secure for the less powerful countries. That could be dangerous as feeling threatened is one of the main causes of aggression. Amatorska filozofia. cz2 2010-11-24
wrzesien- listopad 2010 ------- Jo. ----- Wlasnie, kiedys idac ulica dyskutowalysmy na ten temat, wyobrazic sobie ze kazdy maly motyw moze drastycznie zmienic zycie, nie tylko indywidualnych jednostek, ale czasami moze nawet ludzkosci. wyobraz sobie ze matka hitlera akurat pewnego dnia potknela sie i zachaczyla spodnica o haczyk na klucze, wiec poszla do krawca gdzie spotkala ojca hitlera. otworzyl jej drzwi, poniewaz dostal awans w pracy i byl szczesliwy, ich spojrzenia wymienily sie. ot co. powstal hitler. powiedzmy ze tak byly, w takim scenariuszu za cala II wojne swiatowa odpowiedzialny jest haczyk, a mozna podciagnac to wlasnie domino do nieskonczonosci probujac odnalezc wine w innych objektach. bo haczyk tez ktos zrobil, a ktos wymyslil jak stworzyc ten wlasnie miksture metalu zeby dobrze trzymalo. Jak to jest ze w tej wlasnie minucie, dwoje ludzi spotkalo sie w jednym miejscu i w tej sekundzie wymienili spojrzenia. Mogli podjac decycje aby nie rozmawiac ze soba, a potem cale zycie myslec co by bylo gdyby, jednak wykorzystali swoja wole do splodzenia kogos kto naznaczyl ludzkosc swoja obecanoscia. Jak to jest ze wszyscy jestesmy jakos polaczeni, jak muchy zlapane w siec pajaka.
Masz racje co do decyzji, w jakims sensie moze ksztaltujemy swoj los. Jednak co z tymi decyzjami, czy na prawde je kontrolujemy. Duzo rzeczy dzisiaj mozna wytlumaczyc biologicznie. Osobowosc, rozne procesy. Jak bardzo mozemy ufac swoi decyzjom zeby ocenic ich przynaleznosc do siebie, o ile w ogole jest cos takiego jak JA? Ile razy zdarza sie ze po podjeciu decyzji, powiedzeniu czegos, pytasz sie sama siebie 'co ja wlasnie zrobilam?' poniewaz skok adrenaliny sprawia ze Twoje zachowanie i decyzje sa inne od normy. W takim razie norma jest nasza osobowoscia? A jej wariacje sa tylko objawami, czy to wciaz bedziemy my?
Dusza jest w dupie. Znika w ciemnosciach. Jest w muzyce, w obrazie, we wspomnieniach i w uczuciach jakie pozostaja. W myslach ktore zostaly wypowiedziane i zapomniane, oraz w kazdym miejscu gdzie wlasciciel duszy postawil swoja stope. ----- w muzyce jest cos niesamowicie fascynujacego. jest najlepsza forma ze sztuk, bo najlepiej dochodzi do odbiorcy. w przeciwienstwie do literatury, czy malarstwa. mniej je przezywamy, mniej sie wczuwamy anizeli w muzyke. ----- sluchaj no, ja nie wiem, wez nie wpadaj mi tu w depresje bo ja wiem ze chujnia jest ogolnie. siedze w szkole teraz o 20, cala noc pisalam 2500 slow na psychologie, bo dopiero wczoraj wieczorem wybralam temat i artykuly do uczycia i skonczylam 15 minut przed deadlinem bo o 4,30 poszlam spac na moment i obudzilam sie o 11. zaspalam na lekcje, dzisiaj jest debata do student councilu i wlasnie popijam teraz wino w szkole przed sluchaniem politycznych wymiocin.
nie wiem co pisac, chcialabym usiasc z Toba ryj w ryj, gdzie nie rozmawiamy o problemach bo one nagle magicznie znikaja. Taki przecinek w rzeczywistosci.
dobrze jest, ludzi nie znac to znaczy ze mozesz byc soba ale tez kazdym innym kim chcesz byc bo to daje szanse na nowy wymiar tworzenia rzeczywistosci. mam nadmiar mysli i wlasnie je wyganiam. nie jestem w stanie napisac czegos konkretnego, bo nic w zyciu nie jest konkretne. wszystko to taka mla, jak wchodzenie po schodach bez oparcia. jak gra w weza, gdzie idzie dobrze i nagle spadasz kila stopni w dol zeby czolgac sie po tej samej drodze od nowa. tak juz jest.
odzywaj sie do ludzi, ich glupota przyprawia najwiekszej rozrywki. nie ma ludzi madrych, tak stwierdzam. najwiekszym krokiem w strone zrozumienia tej prawdy jest akceptacja swojego idiotyzmu.
z Bogiem
Urywki z wymiany zdan poprzez elektroniczna poczte. 2010-11-24
2007-2008 Makrela: nic se nie poukladalam, tam nie ma co ukladac, *** Makrela: przyjedz, na wino pojdziem, *** Alien: kurwo, nie moge studiowac w Amsterdamie. Tam chuje chca 4 lata prawa i mi szkoda cennego czasu. Skladam papiery do Londynu na kryminologie/prawo, ale wolalabym na kryminologie z toksykologia. W koncu to bez sensu, ludzie ida na psychologie i prawo i pedagogike. po chuj im to, mysla ze sa madrzejsi dzieki tym studiom, a maja po prostu najebane we lbie wiedzy nikomu nie potrzebnej. psychologia jest nudna. powaznie. przynajmniej ta na lekcjach. lepiej kupic sobie ksiazke ciekawa o psychologii i ja przeczytac niz tracic czas na studiach. *** Makrela: otoz to, kazdy wspomina jak to za mlodu bylo fajnie...ale co im kurwa z tego jak tak teraz nie jest. a jak ja sie pytam calokowicie powaznie, dlaczego teraz juz tak nie jest,? to sie smieja... gupi.dlaczego teraz musza byc starzy, nieszczesliwi, nudni, szarzy dorosli i odpowiedzialni? aha... bo dorosli juz tak?hoho... dobre sobie. wola se wspominac, i czasem u cioci na imieninach wrocic chwiejnym krokiem do domu., gdzie na tych imieninach zachowuja sie jak dorosli, ze nie moge...nikt nigdy nie dorasta. tak naprawde zawsze wszyscy zostajemy dziecmi, to ludzie sobie to wmawiaja, ze sa na TO(szczescie, i dazenie do wlasnych marzen)za starzy, bla bla bla... *** Makrela: za oknem tylko latarnia oswietla marna czern tego zalosnego swiata. zolc-czern, wszedzie, nocny urok, siedze tu i robie matme o.o, , wiec pisze do Ciebie. floydzi na glosnikach, *** Alien: nie powinnysmy byly ogladac tego Placu Zbawiciele. ja wiem kobieto ze zycie jest zalosne i sie z tego nie ciesze. dlatego sie skupiam na kilku pozytywach jak gitara i ksiazki. poza tym marniejszza egzystencja to bycie warzywem po przedawkowaniu w piwnicy. to jak zycie odkladane na zapas do piwnicy, ktore tam przewegetuje w tych ziolkach zamkniete w sloiku. i nawet jezeli dom jest nudny i nieciekawy to lepiej wysilic sie zeby zobaczyc slonce. bo moze tam w miescie jest marna egzystencja ale jest jeszcze swiat dookola, ktory CIe ominie. bo zdarzysz sie wykisic do tego czasu. tymczasem Ci co dzielnie znisili domowa monotonie w koncu wyjda i beda Ci mowic jakie zycie jest fajne (kto wie co bedzie za 20 lat, nie mozna chowac sie przed zyciem. jezeli bedzie to nam pisane to nie unikniemy, ale musimy zrobic wszystko zeby tak nie bylo). wtedy kurwa spojrzysz na swoje kiszone cialo i powiesz sobie 'co ja kurwa zrobilam' *** Alien: ot co. Twoja zyciowa madrosc jest dla mnie oparciem na stare lata (18ka sie zbliza). masz racje., mam nadzieje ze podczas gdy Ty bedziesz na tym fotelu popijac czerwone wino, to ja bede wlasnie truchtac swoim krokiem metr na godzine. w swojej trzesacej sie rece bede trzymac kieliszek i usielnie brnac po to wino, od ktorego sie zaczelo i na ktttorym sie skonczy. zycie mamy tylko jedno i szkoda je zmarnowac na proby i namiastke zycia. zycie jest po to zeby z niego korzystac. mimo wszystko chyba czlowiek powinien miec troche szacunku do siebie i miec inne zainteresowania oprocz robienia gniazda, rozmnazania i zbierania zapasow na zime. *** Makrela: fakt, Degustatorzy slow 2010-11-23
Nowa dawka inteligentnej konwersacji, jakiej brakuje w ostatnich czasach... *** Alien (2-12-2007 13:30) *** MAKRELA (29-11-2007 20:36) |
_Blog agat
Subskrybuj blogi