Seems like a nature vs. nurture thing. Someone with an antisocial disorder was probably born with it; it’s wired into their brain. Someone who is spoiled, became spoiled as the result of spoiling treatment by their parents.
Cool Maurie - your experience and conclusions are obviously far different than mine.
Also, the individuals I encounter are admittedly from one narrow segment of society - those seeking disability benefits.
I don’t disagree, but it’s complicated. Over the years, most of the really highly accomplished kids I have worked with–especially in terms of objective achievement–have had helicopter parents who took care of every issue for them. In the ultra-competitive world of high-achieving students, you pretty much need a pit crew to accomplish the sorts of things top colleges have come to expect from their applicant pool. You can’t maintain a perfect transcript, master a course load that covers the first couple years of a “normal” college, cram SAT/ACT, play a sport, play an instrument, and organize/implement a major community service initiative if you have to come home every night to chores, pack your own lunch or do your own laundry. Those kids work like people trying to make partner at a big law firm, or like first year consultants at BCG (which is who they will be in a few years). The ones that are successful are the ones who have parents who also indulge them–it’s a brutal routine, so they really make significant sacrifices to make sure the kids are happy–they have access to friends, and cool gadgets. It’s exactly like having a stay-at-home spouse to support you emotionally and logistically while you focus entirely on pursuing your career.
Anyway, a surprising number of those kids are wonderful people. Funny, empathic, interesting and interested. They are genuinely hard workers. Much is given to them, but there are also really high expectations for the sort of person they are going to become. But there are gaps–they are quite capable of learning to take care of themselves, but they don’t currently know. They don’t know how to pick their own directions and interests. And they don’t know how to face real challenges on their own and have precious little experience with failure–though, again, I think a lot of them are quite capable of learning, once they need to. But they aren’t generally monsters or anti-social.
Right now it’s trendy in highly selective colleges to bitch about these gaps, about how they keep getting kids who fit this pattern. This really makes me upset, because they’re the ones that created this monster; the kid who is left alone to figure this stuff is not going to have the objective accomplishments these schools effectively insist on.
I don’t think its an either or. I think that people are wired differently, and every parent parents differently. There is a middle of the road course you can travel as a parent that has decent results most of the time with most kids. But some kids respond differently. The right kid with the right parenting turns out fine. Some kids turn out fine with the wrong parenting - something in their makeup has them overcome it. Some kids have great parents and turn out to be little shits. Some kids would simply be better or worse with different decent parents. In a simplistic example, a kid who is physical being raised in a house of intellectual bookworms will struggle. His behavior will get tagged as “acting out” - while the same kid in a house where physical activity is valued will find himself in sports three seasons a year, having his activity level being channeled appropriately and rewarded. My daughter has friends who are twin sisters. One does well, the other struggles. The one who struggles values things like fashion, carrying the proper purse, having the right friends (not necessarily good friends, the right ones). She wants to be pretty, have a boyfriend. If her mother were the cheerleader type, she’d thrive, and her nose to the grindstone geeky twin would be the one who struggles. Instead, the things she values aren’t valued by her family, so she’s faces a lot of internal and external conflict. And because her family doesn’t have any sort of background in the things she wants, they can’t help her achieve them.
I’ve been a mental health patient for 30 years. I’ve had half a dozen diagnosis (or more), been on medication up the yahoo, have done CBT. What works for others doesn’t necessarily work for me - likewise, what works for me, doesn’t necessarily work for others. Mental health treatment is more art, IME, than Science. My parents raised me well - but mental health issues run in the family. I’m neither spoiled or lazy. I’ve been professionally successful - and spent six months last year as a shut in. My issues turn internal - and I’m pretty good at hiding them for extended periods of time. My friend’s nephew with the problems - his issues turn external - he acts out and hurts others.
When we talk about people with mental health issues not having access to guns, I think its strange. Because I’m not at all likely to hurt anyone with a gun. I could see where going to a range might be cathartic for me (I used to shoot once in a while and enjoyed it). My issues don’t act out in the shoot up a shopping mall fashion. Now, my friend’s nephew - I cringed when they taught him to shoot. I’m not likely to torture small animals or become a serial killer. Not all mental health issues are sociopathic, and antisocial behaviors also aren’t necessarily sociopathic.
I’m on a portable device and can’t easily link to an article. Google “James Fallon neuroscientist” and you’ll find some interesting stuff.
Basically this guy’s research (and personal experience) illustrate how complicated personality is. Propensities are certainly established very early in life as the brain is assembled. But the environment one is exposed to in childhood and adolescence is also important. Fallon suspects that if it weren’t for his stable homelife, he would have become turned into a psychopath since he has a psychopath’s brain.
Another source of complication is defining “stable” homelife. One person’s “stable” is another person’s “neglectful and abusive”. Perhaps Fallon’s upbringing was exceptionally good, not merely “stable”. Maybe if he had been raised in a typical household, he’d be sitting in prison right now.
People often use “brain wiring” as an excuse. “As in, my brain is wired to do it this way, so stop giving me a hard time.” But very little of our “wiring” is permanent, so this argument isn’t always that compelling to me. Sure, some things are fixed and outside our control. But I have to think if the autistic can benefit from early intervention, so can anyone who is neurologically aytpical. Perhaps if we can identify kids with psychopathic signs early in life, we can keep those children from growing into full-fledge psychopaths.
Yep, although helicopter parent does not equal “getting into Ivy League school” There are helicopter parents of C+ students, doing their homework for them, picking up their room, arguing the teachers out of the C- their kid deserved (or they deserved). The ones that end up entitled to view the world as owing them, because they’ve never really needed to develop ANY skills - not just the self care/self direction ones. Helicopter parents of high school athletes who are attending every practice, arguing with coaches and refs and other parents. The kids that end up being the entitled jackasses of the world because their parents weren’t the pit crew and cheerleaders for their achievement, but the enablers of their slackerness.
My son works, my daughter doesn’t. My daughter is in four AP or CIS courses and doing a play - she doesn’t have the extra capacity for a job. My son has a grueling load of non college prep senior slide electives including study hall. There is a difference in the expectations at home due to the load at school.
It’s an irregular adjective: my child is unique, your child is challenging, her child is incarcerated.
As well as “my parenting is fine, her parenting is neglectful, their parenting is indulgent.”
Kids are also on a continuum. In some ways it is “easier” to have a child that has obvious special needs versus one that can kinda sorta mainstream much of the time but needs special help others. And how is the latter category different from one that is “spoiled” or just gets a bug up their ass occaisionally? And how do you diagnose?
I have gotten my fair share of well meaning observers and not a few assholes that think my daughter’s autism is parental in nature. YMMV
Even neurotypical kids have bad days. Heck, neurotypical adults have bad days. If you aren’t interacting with someone over a period of time, you have no idea if you are seeing autism, a momentary melt down from a kid who is temporarily overtired and hungry, or a situation created and lived in every moment by the parent and/or child.
And most kids have periods of time where they are barely human. A girlfriends son barely made it through middle school. He has diagnosis - those certainly were part of the issue - but middle school SUCKS and middle school age children are not my favorite age (God Bless Middle School Teachers). Now in high school, he is doing much better - some of his behavioral issues he’s started to mature out of, some are improving through therapy.
You’ve touched on a lot of things here that need dissecting.
You seem to think there is a difference between “disorder” and “personal shortcoming”. I personally don’t. For one thing, a person who acts disordered always does so for a reason–a reason attributable to variables external to a person’s locus of control. If my brain is inherently disordered, I will behave in a disordered way. If my environment has shaped my brain so that it is defefective, I will behave in a disordered way. If my environment does not provide any niches for brains like mine, then my brain is disordered as long as it remains in this environment. In other words, if my brain and behavior are disordered, then I’m disordered. There is no part of me that is independent of my brain.
Of course, when it comes to treatment, knowing the source of the problem is important. People need to know that their maladaptive behaviors are the result of buggy software (maladaptive learning) versus defective hardware (structural abnormalites) versus buggy software AND defective hardware (as is the case when children prone to mental illness are raised by the mentally ill). But it does not make sense to tell someone who is suffering from buggy software that they need to figure that shit out on their own, which it sounds like you’re intimating. No, someone with buggy software needs just as much help as someone with hardware issues. They just need a different kind of fix (like CBT or life coaching).
The same goes for someone who has a brain that doesn’t function well in a particular environment. If the environment they are suited for no longer exists, then I think it is appropriate to call that person “disordered”. I think we are already seeing signs of this happening. Woe to the person with the IQ of 85 raised with averaging parenting, possessing average social skills and average looks. A person like this is now considered “able-bodied”, but just how able-bodied is such a person if they are competing with above-average talent for minimum wage jobs? Nowadays, if you are the least bit prone to social anxiety, then you are truly handicapped since most entry-level work is in the service sector. I actually roll my eyes a little when I hear about people refusing to take anti-anxiety meds while living marginal lives in their parents’ basement. Yeah, I suppose they could figure the shit out on their own in theory, but they aren’t doing it since they don’t have the means to. Our society does not enable folks to “figure shit out on their own”. Basic minimum income would allow this. So would free high-quality mental health services. Both of these things are pie-in-the-sky for the average American right now. A disability check seems like a fair compromise, IMHO.
Your post suggests to me that you and I differ greatly in what we expect in terms of personal responsibility, and the extent to which we expect the individual to fit in to the society, as opposed to society accommodating the individual.
Personally, I have certain mental and emotional strengths, and perhaps even more shortcomings. I have managed to be reasonably successful, productive, and content - tho not always in the manner I would have personally selected.
Your post impresses me as suggesting some sort of biological determinism, suggesting a lack of responsibility for one’s choices and actions. I’m not sure how a society might be ordered around such concepts. The jerk you encounter on the street is not a jerk because their brain chemistry, or their upbringing, or countless other factors made them do it? Is every criminal innocent?
Do I have my own “disability” because I’m aware of social norms of behavior and choose to (mostly) act within them? I believe the vast majority of people have the capacity to make choices. There have been times that I have been tempted to steal things, damage things, or say things to people, or even hurt them - but I choose not to. Hell, I used to be a heavy smoker and drinker, and have stopped both for decades. Some people either did not learn self control, or choose not to exercise it. Many (IMO) get significant mileage out of perceiving and presenting themselves as victims. (Others - I acknowledge - are incapable of perceiving or acting upon it.)
I think that the difference between personality and pathology most likely rests on a continuum. I suspect many folk differ with respect to where we’d place and label folk on that continuum. We’d all likely agree as to extreme cases. But I think there is a vast grey area within which reasonable folk might differ. Is the person cowering in their parents’ basement incapable of working, or are they pursuing a different option which is available to them?
Also, you touch upon the difficulties in today’s job market. I have often questioned, yet never heard anyone intelligently explain, what jobs our economy is going to provide for “average” people - not to mention those who are below average. But just because someone lacks employment advantages does not constitute a compensable impairment.
Modern life IS hard. If people did not feel anxious or depressed about many aspects, THAT would IMO suggest an abnormality.
I think a “disability” payment is NOT the best option, because the term “disability” connotes a permanent condition beyond the individual’s ability to change, thereby reducing motivation. I would far more support universal minimum income, or much more generous voc training and counseling.
I think everyone has a personal responsibility. To the extent that they are capable, a person is on the hook for mitigating the harm caused by their brain no matter what the cause is.
And you had help along the way, no doubt. You had parents and teachers who programmed you in such a way to cope with your shortcomings. You were naturally endowed with enough self-insight and intelligence so that you could do your own “course corrections”, and you have no doubt lived in environments stable enough to foster this kind of activity. You are not a self-made man because no one is. Everyone has received help getting to where they are.
Yes. Because we are biological entities. I don’t believe in souls or spirits. I believe in brains. I don’t think flaws are the result of someone being stupid or destructive just to be stupid or destructive. I think there’s always a biologically-based reason.
You can draw this inference if you want, but it’s not what I’m suggesting at all.
I have a number of flaws and shortcomings. And I’m responsible for handling all of them–even though I’m fully aware that they are biological in nature. For instance, I have an aversion to socializing. It’s a lifelong thing, so I have reason to believe it is an inherent part of my nature. However, that doesn’t mean I can’t learn how to deal with it. Even though hand dominance is hardwired, you can learn how to work around it. Few of our behaviors are hard-coded.
For years, I believed that my social issues were due to a general “personal failure”. Like laziness or special snowflakedom. So I upped my work ethic and tried to be “hipper”. The only thing this accomplished was self-loathing and depression. It was only when I sought a medical intervention for something I thought was totally unrelated that I began to appreciate that sociality, just like all aspects of personality, is biologically determined. There’s a reason why dogs are pack animals while cats are not, and it has nothing to do with the “choices” they’ve made.
Once I made this connection and I realized that I’m not a spoiled brat, I became more amenable to medical and theraputic interventions. I knew I needed help re-wiring my brain so that I could function better, so instead of listening to folks like you, I took my ass to a doctor and stopped trying to figure it out on my own.
The jerk you encounter on the street is a jerk for reasons X, Y, and/or Z. None of those reasons have anything to do with him choosing to be a jerk.
Maybe he’s a jerk because he has limited empathy due to an undeveloped amygdala.
Maybe he’s a jerk because his parents were jerks to him and caused his amygdala to shrivel up.
Maybe he’s a jerk today because something horrible happened to him yesterday to fuck his brain up.
Maybe he’s a jerk because you’re being a jerk to him, and no one ever taught him how to just walk away from a confrontation.
I’m not saying you can’t judge the guy as a jerk. I call people “jerk” all the time. But if we want to minimize the number of jerks that are walking around, we have to actually do something societally. People aren’t just going to “unjerkify” themselves just because we ask them to.
You aren’t disabled because you have learned how to deal with the flaws you might have that would have otherwise limited your functionality, in your current context.
But put you in a context that you aren’t adapted to, that you can’t escape, and you may certainly qualify as “disabled”. Until, that is, your programming changes.
Some people are capable of coming up with new programs without a whole lot of intervention from te outside. These people are usually equipped with intelligence and social supports. Take either or both of these things away and you have a poorly-behaving person. So it’s not like you are inherently better than that person. You’re just luckier.
Choices are a reflection of the options available to you. You may have been tempted to steal things, but I’m guessing you didn’t not because you are morally superior to the thief, but because you had a stronger motivation NOT to. Maybe the thrill of stealing wasn’t as strong as the shame you’d feel if you were caught. Maybe you have a lot more to lose by going to jail compared to the thief.
People tend to exaggerate he intensity of their urges to gloat about the perceived strength of their willpower. “I have cravings for chocolate too, but you don’t see me pigging out!” You have no way of knowiing if the level of temptation you feel is anything like what the thief feels. You may have the urge to do something “bad” but you possess the ability to talk yourself out of it. A person who acts impulsively lacks this ability. They need a therapeutic or medical intervention. Scolding and lecturing ain’t gonna do a damn thing for them.
Without any external help or relapses? You’re a wonderful person, truly. But you aren’t most people. Most people need help kicking these habits.
I think it is more likely the case that people assume incorrectly that you’ve either got it or you don’t. With “it” being some kind of willpower/self-actualization/moral perfection thing. As in “I know I have a bad temper and I can’t possibly imagine there’s a way I’ll ever change, so I’m not even going to bother addressing it. It’s just a fixed part of who I am.”
When really, we all need to get away from the idea that our personalities are “fixed”. Everything about us is rooted in our biology, but our biologiy is influenced heavily by our environments. Instead of chalking intractable problems up to “personal shortcomings”, we need to educate people on the real reasons they do what they do. “People act stupid 'cuz they wanna be stupid” is a backwards approach. “People act stupid because they lack the insight to act smarter” is so much more constructive.
I think there comes a point when it doesn’t matter if a person’s behavior is fucked up because of failures of learning (personality) or because the learning is impeded due to disease (like anxiety). At some point, we just need to say that the person is dysfunctional and that they need help. Let the practitioners determine what that help is.
Right. But if a person can’t take care of themselves because they are too slow, too ugly, and too weird to be hired by anyone, what are they supposed to do? Shrivel up and die? OK, but people rarely do this without engaging in a bunch of “poor choices” first. Personally, I’d like it if society could keep this from happening. Other people’s poor choices have a direct impact on the rest of us.
I agree. And yet we expect people to adapt to stress all on their own, even though the stress is getting more intense and the stakes so much higher. When jobs are plentiful and the cost of living is low, you can have a freak-out at work without it being a life-ruining thing. But nowadays, losing your temper in front of the wrong person can really fuck your life up for a long time. We need to be strengthening the safety net to compensate for the fact that our environments are changing faster than our genes. And I think that necessitates removing the stigma on medical “crutches”. If I’m expected to be grilled by a room full of lawyers all day (as I had to last week), then it should be A-OK for me to pop a Xanax without someone giving me a fuckin’ side-eye. The expectations being placed on me are not natural, so hell yeah I’m going to be seekng some “unnatural” assistance. When we go back to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle, then we can talk about more natural remedies.
If we don’t provide opportunities for change, then people can’t be faulted for not changing. People can’t learn how to fix their problems if they don’t know what problems they have and they don’t how to navigate around them. Depriving these people of disability checks doesn’t make them wonderful human beings. It just pushes them more closer to total self-destruction.
Spoiled is not the teen’s fault, spoiled comes from the upbringing. I’m not sure how the OP is referring to antisocial. I have a teen who is always very sociable with her friends but not always so sociable with her dad and I. She’s 15, sometimes she likes to hang with us and other times she would rather be in her room listening to music, etc. I get it. I’d be concerned if she always wanted to hang with us. If she didn’t enjoy being with her friends or doing things with them, I’d also be concerned.
I understand that (and realize you are joking) but what exactly does a therapist look at to determine whether this is just a kid that needs more discipline/direction or has a medically recognized disorder?
IME therapists are really tentative about medication. Therapists don’t prescribe - psychiatrists prescribe - or sometimes your normal doctor.
Because everyone likes the tools available in their own tool belt, the ones they are most familiar with, therapists tend to like therapy - they also tend to like the therapy schools they have experience with - everything looks like something you can CBT through to someone who does CBT. Psychiatrists like medication. They’ll both tell you they like to work in concert together, and a few do - but many really don’t, and my experience has been that even when you have a team that works together - it isn’t the smoothest of all relationships since, but nature, you are changing multiple variables at once with two (or more) cooks in the kitchen.
Also, a therapist is generally treating a medically recognized disorder, regardless of medication status. My anxiety is real - sometimes its treated with medication, sometimes through therapy, sometimes I do it on my own. Its a little like chronic pain - sometimes you don’t need the drugs and the physical therapy is adequate, sometimes you need the drugs and the physical therapy, some people always need the drugs.
A lot of medication for mental illness is like opiates as well - they really don’t want to hand out addictive Vallium at the drop of a hat any more than they want you to walk around with a Vicodin prescription (this will run counter to Din’s experience, since he sees the people that have reached the point where the medical community has thrown every gun in its arsenal at them to keep them productive - yet they still aren’t productive - and yes, often due to issues other than medical issues - the sad reality of our country is that disability is pretty much it for social safety nets - if you can’t get and keep a job, there aren’t a lot of other choices than the disability system). ADHD drugs are very popularly abused in high schools. Others just have sort of sucky side effects. Other mental illnesses really don’t have a medication - you don’t have one for ODD, which a lot of disturbed young people are diagnosed with. You can treat co-existant issues - ODD often happens in concert with depression/anxiety/ADHD, so you can treat those with medication and hope that relieve those issues will help with the ODD, but ODD is only treated itself with therapy.