What makes Erin Caffey different from the many other teenagers whose parents made them break up with their sweethearts and didn't murder their whole families?
Not a whole lot. Unfortunately this is not an uncommon occurrence. There are a lot of very normative teenagers that have committed atrocious things because they are teenagers and do not have a developed brain.
Something I've noticed in a lot of these sorts of incidents is that there is a group involved. There's a reason that the phenomenon of child soldiers exist as well as groups like The Red Guard in Mao's China. Combine the lack of development with peer pressure and things can go very bad indeed.
Yes, that is absolutely true, but unfortunately there are dire consequences on the developing brain. James Fallon spoke about this in his book:
James Fallon is a neuroscientist. In being such, he obviously has a great deal of knowledge behind the brain, its development, and when it is ready for certain actions. One that he mentions is war and when we should be sending people into battles neurologically. He makes that argument that due to the level of development of the brain in these years, the earliest that a person should be sent into war is twenty-two. In his book The Psychopath Inside that was published in 2013, he states;
Stressful stretches of a young person’s life such as college, first marriage, and especially military combat couldn’t come at a worse time for the developing prefrontal cortex.
This is a big deal for the armed forces. A freshman and a senior in college are very different human beings. Sending kids to war at eighteen is ridiculous, as they’re still in the active state of frontal lobe development. The military uses psychological tests to make sure recruits aren’t crazy, but that won’t tell you how they’ll be in two years. If we’re going to have war, we shouldn’t let soldiers fight until they’re twenty-two or twenty-three.
I think most kids shouldn’t be diagnosed with MANY things, as they are literally forming into adults, and m erroneous or perhaps simply early correct diagnoses can alter how that person forms into an adult. For most kids, diagnoses like these don’t help, but hurt. If something is going to ruin a kid - save it until it won’t. Labels, when you’re an adult, are so hard - imagine what damage they can do to a kid.
(To be clear, I’m not talking about “medical” diagnoses, for the most part, and even then, many things can change as a child grows, and labels taken to heart can become self-fulfilling prophecies.)
Another psychopath over on Quora, Shiloh Munroe, had this exact opportunity, as she was at the university that he lectured at. According to her he shined her on, and had no interest in hearing a word from her.
He doesn't take challenges very well. He gets very litigious.
I agree that crimes of this nature are committed by NTs if the circumstances surrounding their actions have an emotionally-driven genesis, such as hate, jealousy, envy, etc.
However, I can’t think of any circumstance or person in my life that would lead me to murder someone for revenge or gain. There is a line that a normal child wouldn’t cross, unless it was a spontaneous act of fear or anger, which would then generate remorse, regret and guilt. Murder for gain is a whole different animal. Once someone - even very young - starts to premeditate and plan things out, they have a clear view of that line in front of them. If they then choose to cross it, they are not normal - developing brain or not. They may not be psychopathic, but neither are they neurotypical.
Actually, it is pretty common that normative teenagers commit terrible acts. Lack of brain development lends a heavy hand in what they consider acceptable action, because they really do not know what they are doing. They have no sense of the finality, the devastation, the legal consequences, among many other aspects.
I can say with certainty that I couldn’t premeditate something of that nature - murder - and develop a detailed plan for it’s completion, even as a teen, or younger.
I can understand an act in the heat of the moment leading to something that horrific, but the planning process, for me, differentiates ‘normal’ adolescent thinking processes (or ‘non-thinking, more to the point) from a disturbed individual. The only exception I can think of is to seek revenge on someone who has clearly done something harmful to you or someone you care about. You can argue that this applies to this girl’s story, and I would agree. But to cross that line into vengeance of such a brutal and final nature as murder points to a serious issue that isn’t endemic to a normal person, young or not. This may only be my take on this, but I’m no Apex Empath with a cape. This really seems to be the case with all NTs. There’s a clear line that you know not to cross.
A lot of teenagers practice fanciful planning of many things. Murder is not unusual, even the murder of their family. it is not too difficult with a teenagers brain to continue that thought process and fantasy all the way through action. There aren't the same stopgaps, but there definitely is more of a tendency to fixate in younger people.
Still… that last step - execution of the plan, and person(s) - I don’t see happening in the kind of teen that turns out fine in adulthood. I inherited quite the temper, and harbored my share of bad feelings & intent towards people I felt had wronged me or someone I cared about (or an animal, for that matter), and fantasized my share of ‘disciplinary’ scenarios, so I don’t feel I was a wonderfully caring person, compared to the best people I knew, teen or adult. Still, I believe there are two populations of underdeveloped brain types, and one just would not go there. But I’m no psychiatrist/neuroscientist, so that’s just my opinion.
I don't know about that. I have talked to some people for a number of years back and forth, and where they start, to where they end up is pretty significant. I could pretend that I thought it has to do with the advice I provide, but I think it is far more likely to be brain development.
Well I guess he tried to put in some stops, but what I don't understand is why are they being ignored?
Also I agree that kids under 25 should not be labeled, I think I understand why they want to identify them, thinking they will be able to fix them somehow would be my guess. I don't understand why they aren't trying to make better tests.
This seems back asswords to me. I guess they think that Hares work is the gospel or something. Maybe it's useful in a prison setting in some aspects, but not to define a psychopath, as far as I can see.
I don't get it.
I also don't believe we should charge kids as adults. Rather we should be giving them an education in acceptable behavior, and perhaps better support, and counciling. Of course.
I believe some sort of punishment is in order, because they have to learn that there are consequences to their actions.
Not all teens get into trouble, but most get Into something. I think kids need better direction. I also think with both parents working that kids lack the amount of nurture they need. Life's too busy, I think.
I think this has to do with the belief that because they can do one thing, they are perfectly qualified to do another. Over on Quora I had someone make this comment:
"I am appalled. Walker states the qualifications for diagnosing psychopathy in a manner that would lead one to construe that a medical degree is required.
In fact, there are quite a few people besides Psychiatrists who are qualified to diagnose mental health conditions and that includes Primary Care Physicians who have not done fellowships but can in fact diagnose mental illnesses. The others include:
Therapists
Psychologists
Counselors
Clinicians
Psychiatric Nurse Practioners
Clinical Social Workers
While Walker is correct that an “official" diagnosis of ASPD with Psychopathic Features can only be made by a trained professional based on the PCL-R or the DSM-5, I would have to interject that anyone who has ever dealt personally with a psychopath is as qualified as any professional to call them one.
My brother, after receiving an official diagnosis of psychopathy, was removed from his prison cell and incarcerated as an inmate in a mental institution.
This was years after a series of assaults, rapes, attempted murders and murders resulted in him going to prison.
However, I could have pronounced him a psychopath and been absolutely correct when I was five years old and was forced to watch him drive a metal spike through my dog's ears.
It isn't misguided labeling if it's true!"
This came to mind because of that list, nearly none of them are qualified to diagnose psychopathy. However, that doesn't stop people from doing so when they shouldn't. Just as the person that listed all of those professions is incorrect that they are able to diagnose psychopathy, or utilize the PCL-R, the people in those professions might convince themselves that they are qualified because they paid for one of Hare's psychopath spotting seminars.
It is unfortunate that there is this hubris when it comes to identifying psychopathy, but really it seems to almost be an ego thing. Hm... I sense a post about this.
I work on it. There are a lot of reasons people convince themselves that they can do this, so I will have to consider all the possible motivations that I can conceive of.
I think it's very strange too, that so many untrained, so called professionals are allowed to diagnose psychological conditions. Don't they have any restrictions on such things? It seems very haphazard. I know it's a soft science but damn.
You would think so, but I have to say, recently I have seen a dramatic increase in the diagnosis of different things that are supposed to be very rare, and they seem to happen in trends. I very much hope that psychopathy does not become one of those things that becomes a diagnostic fad. It already is for self diagnosis, but would be terrible to become part of the diagnostic trends.
What makes Erin Caffey different from the many other teenagers whose parents made them break up with their sweethearts and didn't murder their whole families?
Not a whole lot. Unfortunately this is not an uncommon occurrence. There are a lot of very normative teenagers that have committed atrocious things because they are teenagers and do not have a developed brain.
Terrifying
Something I've noticed in a lot of these sorts of incidents is that there is a group involved. There's a reason that the phenomenon of child soldiers exist as well as groups like The Red Guard in Mao's China. Combine the lack of development with peer pressure and things can go very bad indeed.
That's probably why governments send young soldiers into war. That and they feel invincible at that age.
Yes, that is absolutely true, but unfortunately there are dire consequences on the developing brain. James Fallon spoke about this in his book:
James Fallon is a neuroscientist. In being such, he obviously has a great deal of knowledge behind the brain, its development, and when it is ready for certain actions. One that he mentions is war and when we should be sending people into battles neurologically. He makes that argument that due to the level of development of the brain in these years, the earliest that a person should be sent into war is twenty-two. In his book The Psychopath Inside that was published in 2013, he states;
Stressful stretches of a young person’s life such as college, first marriage, and especially military combat couldn’t come at a worse time for the developing prefrontal cortex.
This is a big deal for the armed forces. A freshman and a senior in college are very different human beings. Sending kids to war at eighteen is ridiculous, as they’re still in the active state of frontal lobe development. The military uses psychological tests to make sure recruits aren’t crazy, but that won’t tell you how they’ll be in two years. If we’re going to have war, we shouldn’t let soldiers fight until they’re twenty-two or twenty-three.
Yes, agreed
I think most kids shouldn’t be diagnosed with MANY things, as they are literally forming into adults, and m erroneous or perhaps simply early correct diagnoses can alter how that person forms into an adult. For most kids, diagnoses like these don’t help, but hurt. If something is going to ruin a kid - save it until it won’t. Labels, when you’re an adult, are so hard - imagine what damage they can do to a kid.
(To be clear, I’m not talking about “medical” diagnoses, for the most part, and even then, many things can change as a child grows, and labels taken to heart can become self-fulfilling prophecies.)
I agree with you. So much will change as they grow.
Would it be feasible or beneficial for you and Mr. Hare to have a lengthy conversation about psychopathy?
Another psychopath over on Quora, Shiloh Munroe, had this exact opportunity, as she was at the university that he lectured at. According to her he shined her on, and had no interest in hearing a word from her.
He doesn't take challenges very well. He gets very litigious.
SHILOH LIVES NEAR ME. WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE CONTACT WITH HER TO DISCUSS MY FINDINGS REGARDING PSYCHOPATHY. THANKS FOR NAME TO READ HER QUORA POSTS.
Unfortunately she hasn't been around for a good while. She was an excellent writer on the topic. Here is her Quora profile link:
https://www.quora.com/profile/Shiloh-Munroe
thank you for the link
You're welcome
Maybe he will be open to updating and expanding his findings?
Not likely. He has a lot financial investment in nothing changing.
That would be interesting indeed, I want a front row seat.
I don't imagine that he has any interest, considering his response to his work being questioned is to file a lawsuit.
I agree that crimes of this nature are committed by NTs if the circumstances surrounding their actions have an emotionally-driven genesis, such as hate, jealousy, envy, etc.
However, I can’t think of any circumstance or person in my life that would lead me to murder someone for revenge or gain. There is a line that a normal child wouldn’t cross, unless it was a spontaneous act of fear or anger, which would then generate remorse, regret and guilt. Murder for gain is a whole different animal. Once someone - even very young - starts to premeditate and plan things out, they have a clear view of that line in front of them. If they then choose to cross it, they are not normal - developing brain or not. They may not be psychopathic, but neither are they neurotypical.
Actually, it is pretty common that normative teenagers commit terrible acts. Lack of brain development lends a heavy hand in what they consider acceptable action, because they really do not know what they are doing. They have no sense of the finality, the devastation, the legal consequences, among many other aspects.
I can say with certainty that I couldn’t premeditate something of that nature - murder - and develop a detailed plan for it’s completion, even as a teen, or younger.
I can understand an act in the heat of the moment leading to something that horrific, but the planning process, for me, differentiates ‘normal’ adolescent thinking processes (or ‘non-thinking, more to the point) from a disturbed individual. The only exception I can think of is to seek revenge on someone who has clearly done something harmful to you or someone you care about. You can argue that this applies to this girl’s story, and I would agree. But to cross that line into vengeance of such a brutal and final nature as murder points to a serious issue that isn’t endemic to a normal person, young or not. This may only be my take on this, but I’m no Apex Empath with a cape. This really seems to be the case with all NTs. There’s a clear line that you know not to cross.
A lot of teenagers practice fanciful planning of many things. Murder is not unusual, even the murder of their family. it is not too difficult with a teenagers brain to continue that thought process and fantasy all the way through action. There aren't the same stopgaps, but there definitely is more of a tendency to fixate in younger people.
Why did you pick Substack over other venues as your venue for writing?
I just happened across it, and quite liked it.
Still… that last step - execution of the plan, and person(s) - I don’t see happening in the kind of teen that turns out fine in adulthood. I inherited quite the temper, and harbored my share of bad feelings & intent towards people I felt had wronged me or someone I cared about (or an animal, for that matter), and fantasized my share of ‘disciplinary’ scenarios, so I don’t feel I was a wonderfully caring person, compared to the best people I knew, teen or adult. Still, I believe there are two populations of underdeveloped brain types, and one just would not go there. But I’m no psychiatrist/neuroscientist, so that’s just my opinion.
I don't know about that. I have talked to some people for a number of years back and forth, and where they start, to where they end up is pretty significant. I could pretend that I thought it has to do with the advice I provide, but I think it is far more likely to be brain development.
Well I guess he tried to put in some stops, but what I don't understand is why are they being ignored?
Also I agree that kids under 25 should not be labeled, I think I understand why they want to identify them, thinking they will be able to fix them somehow would be my guess. I don't understand why they aren't trying to make better tests.
This seems back asswords to me. I guess they think that Hares work is the gospel or something. Maybe it's useful in a prison setting in some aspects, but not to define a psychopath, as far as I can see.
I don't get it.
I also don't believe we should charge kids as adults. Rather we should be giving them an education in acceptable behavior, and perhaps better support, and counciling. Of course.
I believe some sort of punishment is in order, because they have to learn that there are consequences to their actions.
Not all teens get into trouble, but most get Into something. I think kids need better direction. I also think with both parents working that kids lack the amount of nurture they need. Life's too busy, I think.
I think this has to do with the belief that because they can do one thing, they are perfectly qualified to do another. Over on Quora I had someone make this comment:
"I am appalled. Walker states the qualifications for diagnosing psychopathy in a manner that would lead one to construe that a medical degree is required.
In fact, there are quite a few people besides Psychiatrists who are qualified to diagnose mental health conditions and that includes Primary Care Physicians who have not done fellowships but can in fact diagnose mental illnesses. The others include:
Therapists
Psychologists
Counselors
Clinicians
Psychiatric Nurse Practioners
Clinical Social Workers
While Walker is correct that an “official" diagnosis of ASPD with Psychopathic Features can only be made by a trained professional based on the PCL-R or the DSM-5, I would have to interject that anyone who has ever dealt personally with a psychopath is as qualified as any professional to call them one.
My brother, after receiving an official diagnosis of psychopathy, was removed from his prison cell and incarcerated as an inmate in a mental institution.
This was years after a series of assaults, rapes, attempted murders and murders resulted in him going to prison.
However, I could have pronounced him a psychopath and been absolutely correct when I was five years old and was forced to watch him drive a metal spike through my dog's ears.
It isn't misguided labeling if it's true!"
This came to mind because of that list, nearly none of them are qualified to diagnose psychopathy. However, that doesn't stop people from doing so when they shouldn't. Just as the person that listed all of those professions is incorrect that they are able to diagnose psychopathy, or utilize the PCL-R, the people in those professions might convince themselves that they are qualified because they paid for one of Hare's psychopath spotting seminars.
It is unfortunate that there is this hubris when it comes to identifying psychopathy, but really it seems to almost be an ego thing. Hm... I sense a post about this.
A post about this would be good. I think it's outrageous that they can do that without the proper training.
That's a long list of people that should not be qualified. What a mess.
I work on it. There are a lot of reasons people convince themselves that they can do this, so I will have to consider all the possible motivations that I can conceive of.
I think it's very strange too, that so many untrained, so called professionals are allowed to diagnose psychological conditions. Don't they have any restrictions on such things? It seems very haphazard. I know it's a soft science but damn.
You would think so, but I have to say, recently I have seen a dramatic increase in the diagnosis of different things that are supposed to be very rare, and they seem to happen in trends. I very much hope that psychopathy does not become one of those things that becomes a diagnostic fad. It already is for self diagnosis, but would be terrible to become part of the diagnostic trends.
Agreed