So let’s say brain science in 15, 20 years really understands why a certain population
of people, say psychopaths, behave the way they do. OK, we know it, we got it. And
let’s say we have figured out a treatment for them. So you got the psychopath. He
has done the crime. We hold him responsible. Now we’re at the decision. Do we treat him
or put in the slammer? Right, because we now know if we can treat him they’re back to
the normal population, they’re back doing normal things again. Does that satisfy in
us the sense of justice that should be done to this person? Does that satisfy our built
in sense of retribution, which I think humans have in spades? Can people live with the
fact that somebody who carried out a crime against their family or their body or their
property is just simply fix the guy so he doesn’t do that stuff anymore - or do they
want this other component and does that other component?
That is the discussion we should be having. We shouldn’t be confusing the fact that someone
with a slight or even a serious brain disorder, are they responsible or not. We should
have the legal category in our country, which we don’t: guilty but insane, not not guilty
because insane. We should get the responsibility issue clear and then as a society we have
to decide well what are we going to do about that person and just think how interesting
it gets. I think our time would be better spent trying
to sort that out because I think down the pike there will be treatments. There will
be more effective treatments. The reason why it isn’t a burning issue now is because
none of our so-called treatments or rehabs or what have you are that great. The recidivism
rate just sits there around 63% no matter what you do. So there is just isolation
of just put people in institutions of one kind or another.
I think by clearing up this responsibility question we focus on the real question of
what does our society decide to do about this person and that’s a tough one.