Forums Forums National News Jon venables back in prison

Jenny, that should have read "science based". Science obeys rules and laws, theories about behaviour don't obey laws, there are no constants. Doctor Spock the child behaviour "scientist" has changed his views as he learned through life experience instead of theory, he has admitted he'd got it wrong. A brave man to admit that but wrong none the less.
It's fair enough to try and help people when they are having a bad time, can't cope, have an illness which they can't do anything about etc. These folk need all the assistance we can give them, but those who truly rebel for rebellions sake, because they don't like the rules the rest of us live by, ditch 'em. Your posts have made me think back to when I was their age and the crowd I was knocking around with and I realise some of them were intrinsically bad. That's why by the time I was about 10 I changed my peer group. What I thought then has been illustrated to me over the years since. The bad ones stayed bad, and I'm no saint believe me, but I knew the difference between good, bad and downright evil.

Yes you are right sort of. Some of Psychology is totally scientific, for instance most of Biological Psychology, which measures things like if you see a happy picture your brain will react and then it will cause you to smile. The way in which this is measured is scientific as it uses rules and laws. Some of psychology relies on science based testing,, using similar rules and laws, like developmental psychology whereas some of psychology is sociologically based and is more to do with theries and experiences. There are constants and scientific rules in some of psychology. Child behaviour tends to be covered in developmental psychology and therefore you are right his work will be science based. Psychology is much more than just what we see on TV. When you start talking about neurons in the brain and scientific studies and investigations its a whole different thing and most of the time different behaviours go across different types of psychology.

Any way slightly off topic there.

SOme people that we think are intrinsically bad though have many underlying issues. I was told a story by a social worker about a boy of 8 years who was his mum's carer, He would get up, get his mum up and his two sisters feed them all, distribute medicine, and then take his siters to school. He would barely feed himself and would look tatty and may not have had time to do his homework. He was said to be a trouble maker by his teacher because when he was given detention for looking tatty etc, he could not turn up as he had to pick up his sisters and go care for his mother. He eventually stood up in class and told the teacher where to go, he ended up in prison at the age of 16 (i was not told what he had done but it must have been bad to be in prison at that age). There is no way that anyone can say that this child was born evil. This is what really upsets me, this child could with support have finished school and been a fantastic part of society. The way this story relates is because this boy was not born evil but he ended up doing an evil thing because society let him down.

Bandy coot the reason why the age of criminal responsibility is 10 is because the law recognises that some 10 year olds do grasp more than others but some really do not. Under 10 it is doli incapax which means they can not be trialed. Until 1999 a child under 14 could not be convicted unless the court was totally satisfied he knew what he was doing.

Jenny, First of all, as your probably aware by now, i wouldn't have let Thompson and Venables out in the first place, as they are, i don't believe in moving the goal posts now and bringing back in to detention without reason. This being out on licence has some worry, they are either a threat to society or not, if they are and need to be monitored, what are they doing free. If they are not a threat, why the monitoring. I am fully aware from childhood we can learn many things, good, bad, love, hate and of course much more. If we are born evil, what is there to learn, only how to carry out evil deeds, this is were we probably differ,
Mainstream thinking think that circumstances produce evil deeds, were as i think its only a matter of time they find the evil deed to commit. I refuse to accept it has anything to do with social standing, upbringing, deprivation, if that was the case, half the world would be mass murderers. I do accept however the world of science and medicine like to call it something different, after all how could we when we find out for sure call a baby evil.

Measuring and highlighting brain activity in the different areas of the brain is Biology, a science. Making up theories to cover peoples actions is psychobabble. A for instance is where someone will be thinking and believing in one direction but can then have that direction altered by someone presenting a cogent argument to counteract the belief and persuade them change direction. The brain activity in that part of the brain will hardly show any different patterns or activity, it will just show the same reactions via the sensors and monitoring equipment. If ever we find a way to deconstruct the impulses that trigger thoughts and actions then we really will be amongst the black arts. The guy this week who can "see through his tongue" shows that things are working towards this, frightening. But to get back to the discussion, a bad 'un is a bad 'un and should be treated as such and without a method of reconstructing his grey matter I will always believe that. The lad who was acting as carer was let down, along with his family, by the "Social Services", who are good at theories and getting degrees but not much good when it comes down to doing the job.

There is actually a psychological study that suggests that people can be born with a 'more likeliness' to do things against society. This does not mean that they will definitely do something bad it just means that there is a link to their biology. Like for instance if someone hit me I would probably not hit them back, if that was another person they may act differently. But you would not support this right? As psychology is just babble.

Measuring and highlighting brain activity in the different areas of the brain is Biology, a science. Linking this to Behaviour is Biological Psychology. When you are scared do you feel the adrenaline? your heart pumps faster? Do you freeze, fight or run? This is psychology because its why you behave, its not a theory its using science to explain why you might run and the processes that run up to your reaction. Talking about neuroscience is babble to you? How about figuring out which part of the brain to cut in epilepsy to do the least damage? If someone suffers brain damage if a particular area of the brain would it not be good to know that maybe they can not communicate via words anymore but if we give them a piece of paper they can draw it? Is this really babble? This is all biological psychology.

Well I hope to be good at my job thank you very much, the degree in social work which i have applied for is to be even better at helping people who are in need. Please don't label everyone under the same name. You would be surprised at how many social workers really do help people.

I will come back in a bit and answer a bit more sorry for going a lil off topic...although it is sort of related