Ken Vaillancourt Forensic Psychology Book Report: Without Conscience The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us Term

m 3 29 Jan 12 I found this book very interesting. While the author, Robert Hare, takes a high moral tone, he manages to avoid any of the key questions pertaining to psychopaths. On countless occasions, people have routinely been classified as nuts or crazy, just because they have been qualified by symptoms listed in the American Psychiatric Associations Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. In his book, Hare takes a different road. He feels that just because a person has received a psychiatric diagnosis as a psychopath, that doesnt necessarily make them insane. Hares book is intriguing, but in the end, he fails to justify his main idea.

There are many facts presented in this book, all of which are useful in a multitude of ways. Mr. Hare has devoted his entire professional career to the study of psychopaths. He developed his psychopathic checklist, which he says is the best tool for discovering and diagnosing true psychopaths. Also, Hare says that by using his list, officials would be able to predict which criminals are more likely to re-offend if they were released from prison. Along with that, Hare also claims that the diagnosis of Antisocial Personality Disorder (or Conduct Disorder for children) is continually misused, basically being used to label anyone who even remotely exhibits criminal tendencies. Hare withholds this diagnosis solely for those individuals that he feels meet a much stricter set of criteria, criteria all defined on his checklist.

The hard part here is how we go about describing psychopaths. Many of them are self-centered and act with little restraint. They tend to lie for attention or out of pure habit and can and will manipulate others for their own benefit. At times they can be violent, and due to their previously mentioned impulsivity, they tend to do stupid things that get them caught and put in prison. Somehow, though, they tend to always be charming and persuasive, which how they tend to earn early paroles and how they continually manage to trick people in the first place. This is where we encounter our first set of questions about psychopaths: are they truly old and calculating or do they tend to rely more on instinct alone? The second question here is how we go about explaining their lack of conscience. What we do know for certain is that psychopaths do not share any sympathies for the people that they take advantage of. Is the answer then because they are morally bad, or rather, because they have cognitive disabilities? Is this characterization wrong? Can not caring about those around you really truly mean that a person is evil?

These are the different questions answered, and focused on, in this book. Hare does a good job of defining the questions, and then giving an accurate description of what it means to be a psychopath. He frames his chapter with many detailed examples and uses many stories from different newspapers to help further define his claims. Unfortunately, all of this also combines to make the book seem more like a fictional narrative, and less like a nonfictional read. When it comes to truly understanding the book, Hare doesnt provide enough information for the reader, or author, to take a stand on one side of the issue or the other. Initially, we are of the opinion that psychopaths have something wrong with them, which we assume is related to their lack of a conscience, inhibition, or self-control. Later,

however, we find that psychopaths rarely lose control, and are always very self-aware. Hare also states that psychopaths are freer than the rest of us because, due to the limits of their conscience, they do not share the same inhibitions as the rest of use, which leaves them wide open to do whatever they want. Based off this description, we are left to assume that it is the normal people who have issues.

There are some excellent points about this book that stood out. Hare does a pretty solid job of pointing out the hard question; he states that some people feel that because psychopaths are unable to fathom an emotional understanding of the worlds morality that they are therefore at an intellectual shortcoming as compared to those around them. Hare points out that while this may make sense in theory, the practical implications are limited. From this, it shows us that psychopaths have every ability to understand morality, and to pass the legal tests for insanity.

Of course, from these questions, we arrive at yet another question. Do the current tests for insanity do an adequate job of helping to diagnose it? Lets say the test is good enough, that still leaves us asking one important question; that question is whether we should blame psychopaths. Can we truly say that they just dont know any better? Unfortunately, the answer is not a clear one. The first answer is yes, but that is simple because while the psychopath does not emotionally understand morality, one would understand it intellectually. When people have freedom of action, we usually mean this in two different ways. First, that they intellectually understand what options they have, and

second, being able to emotionally bring themselves to act on this options. Because of this, our question now is how do we go about holding people accountable for their actions?

Finally, one issue not presented in this book is why being a psychopath is even a mental disorder to begin with. Hare clear demonstrates that there is no test reliable enough to define, and then change, the personality of a psychopath. He expresses tons of disbelief and no hope at the idea of a treatment ever being discovered. Based off of Hares book, it leaves one feeling as if this diagnosis shouldnt even be considered as a psychiatric disorder. Luckily for them there is clear evidence that psychopaths are definitely different from other people in every way mentally possible. Science is showing that this could be due to physical difference in the brain, but this doesnt mean that they necessarily have a disorder. Throughout the book, the author is definitely willing to hold the criminals responsible for their actions. Because of this, it makes the reasoning for classifying psychopaths as being mentally ill completely unclear. People might say that psychopaths are not normal, but if that is true, then what good could possibly come from labeling them? It wouldnt help increase our understanding of them. It is probably an unintended outcome that Hare has brought this question to the forefront of his book.