There has always been controversy, whether criminal behavior is tied with abnormalities in the brain and as we know diverse regions of the brain control human being actions, thoughts, emotions and senses. In fact it is through behavior how the brain begins to disentangle. There is many elements that can lead disruptive behavior in early stages of childhood to criminal activity in the future and although it might be expensive the government should create a new policies where individuals who have abnormalities in the brain be coerced to seek treatment and there should also be policies where there is much more effective gun administration regulations.
First of all our behavior is affected by diverse factors one of them being nature vs. nature. Nature refers to any inherited traits or other biological components and nurture refers to the external factors such as environment exposure and life experiences one goes through. This is of great importance because both intertwine to formulate what becomes our behavior and personality. One work of literature that represents this theme would be the novel Frankenstein that was written by Mary B. Shelley. Although it is just a work of literature, it strongly addresses the issue of nature vs. nature and brings into question whether who we are and our personality is sparked by the way we are raised or because of genetic factors. This relationship is seen through the characters of Victor Frankenstein and his creation: the monster. Victor had created a deformed and hideous creator with immense strength, that he later rejects upon his creation. The monster is rejected by its own creator and townspeople.
Eventually, he leaves to the forest where for a few months observes the DeLacey family and through them he learns about love, care and affection. This is where we see a snippet of nurture where his experience of being neglected seeks him to pursue revenge and kill everyone Victor loves. In most cases murders are predisposed to an environment where they lack attention from paternal figures or they come from a chaotic atmosphere where individuals dont know whats out there because that disruptive environment is what they been surrounded by for years and do not know nothing more or nothing less. In fact, situational factors have been linked to aggression. Aggressive acts involve words, threats or intimidation and usually arise when people feel socially rejected and this is perceived in Frankenstein.
The monster is intelligent and had cognitive thinking that allowed him to plan the attack but he reaction was based on an impulse. These acts of aggression have been linked to the Monoamine Oxidase (MAOA) gene, which is an enzyme that regulates the activity of a number of neurotransmitters. These neurotransmitters are serotonin and norepinephrine. And this gene appears to make individuals most likely to take part in antisocial behaviors. Serotonin is one important neurotransmitter because it is responsible for aggressive behavior. When Serotonin is disrupted this leads people to respond impulsively.
It is important to understand that Frankenstein’s reaction was based on an impulse. This has a biological component that we can relate to neuroscience. As I mentioned before the brain is composed of diverse regions and each regions is responsible for a specific function. In this case we are going to emphasize on the frontal lobe, medial and orbitofrontal regions. The frontal lobe is responsible for executive and cognitive functioning. The frontal lobe carries out moral decision making, impulse control and emotion regulation which contributes to criminal offending. There has been a case study where on average, the murderers showed significantly lower rates of glucose uptake in three areas of the brain — the prefrontal cortex, the corpus callosum and the posterior parietal cortex. Their rates were 4, 18 and 4 percentage points lower, respectively, than the rates measured in control subjects performing the same tasks. This is noteworthy because the prefrontal cortex which is located in the frontal lobe is implicated in the restriction of aggressive behavior. There has been evidence that any type of damage done to this region has a relationship with impulsiveness and actions that are not controllable.
We also have the posterior parietal cortex which plays a role in the unification of sensory input. Reduced glucose uptake in a portion of this region (the left angular gyrus) has been correlated with reduced verbal ability, while damage has been linked to deficits in reading and arithmetic. Violent offenders have consistently been shown to do worse in school than their law-abiding peers. The deficient functioning of limbic areas (thalamus, the amygdala and hippocampus) which are responsible for social behavior can help justify why murders lack success to learn from experience and are less likely to be able to control their emotions.
Straying away from literature we can see similar characteristics in present day examples like Nicholas Cruz, Parkland Florida shooter and David Long, Thousand Oaks shooter. Being ostracized and the desire to react have been recognized as principal factors in school shootings. Such is the case of Nicholas Cruz, who came from a disruptive home, he would often engage in fights and kill small animals. As we can see he engaged in turbulent and violent behavior as a youngster and the death of his stepmother carried more onto his depression. This type of aggressive behavior is not just seen in school shooters but in veterans of war.
The hypothesis of frontal lobe dysfunction in predisposing to criminal behavior is also supported by several large systematic studies on cohorts of war veterans with head injuries. According to the research presented those who have brain damage have increased aggressive behavior. A clear example of this would David Long a marine veteran who killed 12 people at a country music bar. Long was supposedly diagnosed with Post-Traumatic stress but precautionary steps were not taken to ensure he would not cause harm. He is where our issue arises. Should criminals be exempt from culpability of malicious acts? And what type of policies should the government enforce? In reality it depends, because some murders or criminals are incapable of understanding the actions they have committed, meanwhile there is others who are aware of their acts. Certain individuals with mental abnormalities sustain higher IQs and can be manipulative. As we can see there is a difference between the two.
Those who exhibit a behavior where they are to a certain extent unaware of their actions should be coerced into rehabilitation unlike those who are aware be submitted to prison but they should also undergo a rehabilitation program. Based on my personal experience my brother has a mental disorder that causes him to act violently at times when not intaking his medication and has refused to undergo a therapy program because he is an adult. Instead the government should implement a policy where the ill persons opinion should not be taken into consideration when it comes to whether they want to undergo a rehab program since they are not one-hundred percent mentally okay. Since most violent cases are based on guns the government should invest more money to implement stricter regulations of guns. Something else that can help is that after rehabilitation, doctors follow up to ensure the patient is following the treatment and if they fall again to disruptive behavior undergo a different treatment. Lastly, as we were able to see through the work of literature maternal rejections also predisposes to criminal activity, mothers who fall under this category be forced to undergo treatment as well.
