When some individuals commit particularly heinous crimes that defy all normal human comprehension such as this one reported in Australian news over the last days, can a case be made that allows for the judiciary to impose an indefinite period of intensive psychological and physical testing of the perpetrator instead of just a term of imprisonment?
It seems to me that attempts to punish or rehabilitate such ‘broken’ people are effectively futile, and that locking them up for the rest of their natural lives (or executing them for that matter), while protecting THEM from lurking dangers, actually does nothing to further our understanding of why some people do really awful things.
To my knowledge, western penal systems currently have no provision/s for using human beings as lab-rats/guinea-pigs in any sort of comprehensive study of psychopathy or sociopathy (to any real intents and purposes.)
Thus, for the sake of this discussion, I propose that the sentence for those found guilty of abominable* crimes be a term of life imprisonment in a research facility, able to be subject to any and all testing procedures deemed appropriate** (even when they are life-threatening) in order to hopefully further our knowledge of detection and prevention of such behaviours in the future.
I’m working from the standpoint here that all such perpetrators have forfeited their rights to citizenship of the human community by the commission of their horrendous acts of barbary. They can, however, have their ‘worth’ restored to some extent by submitting to the testing and lab-studies mentioned above. They will never be released, but their lives can serve some beneficial purpose in the interim.
Can a case be made??
Abominable crimes: the ones that make you gasp, shake your head in sickening wonderment, or want to vomit. Serial killers, those who torture their unsuspecting victims, mass-murderers…those crimes that cannot under any circumstances be ‘explained away’ by any reasonable person.
** Appropriate ‘testing’ for the purposes of this hypothetical would be set and governed by a body of doctors, scientists, geneticists and ethicists (and maybe a religious minister thrown in for good measure!) to ensure that the study has some merit and is not just being done for gratuitous purposes.
No one ever gives up their rights as a human under our constitution, so your proposal would not be legally possible, I hope. Cruel and unusual punishment.
From a human standpoint what you propose is horrendous, bringing us down to their level. No thanks. Science already kills and tortures countless helpless animals with horrendous experiments, God forbid we should add humans to the list. I have visions of human experiments of the variety that happened during WWII.
You can’t psychologically test a non-compliant person. Your results, assuming you get any, will be invalid or suspect.
My experience is that people who commit heinous crimes are often tested and interviewed extensively as part of the forensic process associated with the legal procedings. There may be further testing if they are found guilty and incarcerated, in order to determine appropriate placement, medication, and/or intervention (or to try to build a new assertion of insanity).
Psychological testing is very useful, but has its limits. I can fake many personality tests (because I’m trained to administer them), but given my familiarity with test construction, I could probabably fake some tests I’m not familiar with. Somebody who wanted to know how to fake test responses could learn how to do so reasonably easily if this were their goal. It’s easier, however, to simply decline to take the test. What can the institution do then? Withhold privileges? Many people in psychiatric settings refuse testing even under relatively coercive circumstances, because they’re sick of it, don’t like being told what to do, or see it as an intrusion on their privacy. You can make testing a condition of certain kinds of treatment, but that may not be sufficient incentive and it may not yield useful results.
Talking with the person and observing and characterizing his/her interactions with other people over time would likely be more productive, in my opinion, and also has the virtues of being long-term, harder to scam, and naturalistic.
Even if what you propose wasn’t illegal (for good reason), and even if we wanted to be people who torture other people (those who have hijacked our government notwithstanding), it would make no sense.
Do you seriously think that you could test, probe or dissect a human being to learn their true nature? If so you’re taking that western patriarchal mindset just a bit too far.
Who would decide which crimes were abominable enough to warrant such a penalty? Would the qualifying crimes change depending on who held political power at any given time? Would abortion be such a crime? How about multiple abortions? Abortions forced on others? Genocide? There are some people who consider eating animal flesh an abomination–do they get a vote?
I don’t think it is possible for humans to “forfeit their rights to citizenship of the human community.” Until they die, they remain human, regardless of how abhorrent they are to those who are not “broken.” (I’m not sure why, but that term makes me shudder.) We are what we are as a species, good and bad. Judging some members of the group as so inferior as to be suitable test subjects hasn’t worked out well in the past, and I can’t see any compelling reason to try it again.
I’d go so far as to say you have a good idea; testing and studying these people should be an option and some procedure should be set up.
But it is only a good idea up to a point: I think it should be voluntary and open on all fronts. A remorseful killer can maybe give some tiny measure back to society by letting us learn how and why his mind allowed him to commit his crimes. But it has to be voluntary and the option to quit at any time must always be on the table.
kambuckta, what if you were the scientist and you found out that one of the “lab rats” had a genetic disorder that caused his madness over a period of time. A genetic disorder that you and your son also have?
Also, if we are able to dehumanize this person into being a “lab rat,” how are we different from him?
What about the anguish and torture that he or she would feel? Is that pain in any way lessened because we have changed that person’s label? Do you have any idea yourself what mental anguish and disintegration are like?
You mean ‘barbarity’. And I agree that your idea sounds, ironically, completely barbaric. Do you expect to dissect their brains and find the fabled ‘Sicko Node’ or something?
Just how are you going to protect the employees in the research facility?
The FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit (BAU) does interview the worst criminals. Early in his career, Robert Ressler was interviewing the 6’9" 300 pound Edmund Kemper, who threatened to screw his head off. He managed to talk the guy down, and immediately made it mandatory for each interview to be conducted by two agents.
Confronting these people is not safe. They are very manipulative and will win your trust, then turn around and use it to their advantage.