http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41896386/ns/health-mental_health/t/brain-scans-reveal-criminal-mind/
The article starts off by stating that there is a difference (that can be seen in physical terms) between “normal” human brains and that of the illusive “Criminal Mind”. Illusive in the sense that since Lombroso, criminal theorists have tried time again, to find the necessary difference in biology that creates the propensities and recidivism in some, as well as the apparent absence in the majority (deviancy). The article uses the example of people who are diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder and specifically the size and growth patterns of their amygdala. It also states that there is also differences in behavior between deviants and normal people through measuring fear response. It even goes into the ethical issues that arise, such questions as:”What to do with at-risk children and by what method”. It also affects the law, because one can easily argue that since they are compromised individuals (elements of Goffman’s stigma) they are not responsible for their actions; but we can relegate this argument to a slippery slope argument.
In the article “The Brain on the Stand” that we discussed in class, we again revisit some of Lombroso’s legacy the same search for the biological criminality, but by different methods; that of the f.M.R.I. and neuroscience. And like the article above it also ponders the question of the problem of holding people accountable for their predispositions (if the criminal biology exists in a somewhat meaningful form) rather then their actions, as codified by the Anglo-American principles of jurisprudence. Both articles echo each other in content but, the article in class gives us a much more complementary experience (incorporating Lombroso into the discussion).
The article you linked to says that the 21 brains scanned all belonged to people with Antisocial Personality Disorder. This diagnosis was used as a basis for labeling them as deviant. So already the group was selected based on a factor which is disputable. Remember that overdiagnosis and misdiagnosis are real problems overlooked in the medical field, due to their lobbying power and pressure to present a professional, infallible front to the public. These studies need to be conducted with less bias. Select people at random and you could possibly find that people with no similar psychiatric conditions have inexplicable brain similarities! It’s all in the interpretation, as I’ll expand upon.
These brains were scanned with expectations of what the outcomes would be before the results were obtained. The medical field bases their power in objective science, saying the results don’t lie. Well the brain scans are real. But the interpretations of the brain scan is what matters. The interpretations of real statistics and images can be influenced and skewed by the political power aspect of the medical field. That is, they are interpreting the results in such a way that justifies and gives credibility to their profession. Considering the huge influence of the medical field on deviance in the justice system, this has real implications for people who misbehave and disrupt society, and how they will be treated by the doctors and the courts. The medical field has power over diagnosis and treatments of disease. Doctors not only have the power to label you, but to decide what treatment you get. The criminal justice system usually follows doctor’s recommendations, giving the medical field further legitimization and power over people’s lives.
– Kelly Reznick