The Societal Response to Psychopathy in the Community

Abstract

The harm usually associated with psychopathy requires therapeutically, legally, and ethically satisfactory solutions. Scholars from different fields have, thus, examined whether empirical evidence shows that individuals with psychopathic traits satisfy concepts, such as responsibility, mental disorder, or disability, that have specific legal or ethical implications. The present paper considers the less discussed issue of whether psychopathy is a disability. As it has been shown for the cases of the responsibility and mental disorder status of psychopathic individuals, we argue that it is undecided whether psychopathy is a disability. Nonetheless, based on insights from disability studies and legislations, we propose that interventions to directly modify the propensities of individuals with psychopathic tendencies should be balanced with modifications of the social and physical environments to accommodate their peculiarities. We also suggest how this social approach in some practical contexts that involve non-offender populations might be effective in addressing some of the negative effects of psychopathy.

All Walks of Life: Editorial for the Special Issue on “The Impact of Psychopathy: Multidisciplinary and Applied Perspectives”

“…This latter point may be particularly noteworthy, as it counters the widespread belief that harms associated with psychopathy decrease with age, and also stresses the importance of age-sensitive assessment of psychopathic traits (e.g., Andersen et al, 2022). These findings also support Lilienfeld et al, (2019) contention that what most specifically makes psychopathy a form of psychopathology is the degree to which it impacts the social adaptability of both self and others (see also Jurjako et al, 2022). On the other hand, in Stewart et al's (2022) study, alleged psychopathic traits in the co-worker were associated with stronger post-traumatic growth, suggesting that longer-term positive outcomes associated with the presence of psychopathic traits may also be possible.…”

“…To this end, while only two of the papers included in the Special Issue focused on forensic samples (and more specifically on treatment and recidivism; Polaschek et al, 2021 ; Rojas & Olver, 2022 ), all 10 papers have nonetheless offered a clear focus on the detrimental impacts that individuals with psychopathic traits can impart within society. Indeed, included manuscripts focused on the impact of psychopathy within romantic relationships (in both middle and older adulthood; Andersen et al, 2022 ; Forth et al, 2022 ; Uzieblo et al, 2022 ), within parent-child dyads ( Fanti & Lordos, 2022 ; Kuay et al, 2022 ), within the workplace ( Kranefeld et al, 2022 ; Stewart et al, 2022 ), and within society at large ( Jurjako et al, 2022 ). Across these studies, the significant, detrimental impact that individuals with heightened psychopathic traits impart is highlighted, not only for their victims, but also for their family, friends, and colleagues.…”

Reconsidering harm in psychiatric manuals within an explicationist framework

“…political, religious, or sexual) and conflicts that are primarily between the individual and society are not mental disorders unless the deviance or conflict results from a dysfunction in the individual (…). (DSM-5, APA 2013 , p. 20) This indicates that conditions primarily defined in terms of social deviance and harm such as those involving antisocial personalities can be considered as mental disorders only if they are underpinned by some form of internal dysfunction (Jurjako et al 2021 ).…”

The objective stance and the boundary problem

“…Specifically, whether the relevant constructs are sufficiently robust, and whether at least some kinds of psychopathologies count as disabilities and disease; see e.g., Nadelhoffer andSinnott-Armstrong (2013), andcf. Juriako, Malatesti, andBrazil (2021). 24 This claim can be vindicated from a variety of theories: so-called causal-relational approaches to autonomy, the theories of moral scaffolding, and circumstantialism, which take the socio-relational status of people as key determinants of autonomy.…”

“…Specifically, whether the relevant constructs are sufficiently robust, and whether at least some kinds of psychopathologies count as disabilities and disease; see e.g., Nadelhoffer andSinnott-Armstrong (2013), andcf. Juriako, Malatesti, andBrazil (2021).…”