Lesher says, “Addiction is a brain disease expressed in the form of compulsive behavior.” As with most chronic diseases, addiction should also be treated with multiple recurring treatments since the brain chemistry of addicts often causes them to relapse into drug use. Lesher makes his case that addiction is a brain disease by stating that addicts cannot quit taking drugs on their own because they require medical treatment like most ill patients. The authors final opinion on addiction is that initial drug use is present due to the voluntary behavior of the addict and while it does not absolve the user of their responsibility as it was their fault, once they have developed an addiction, their brain has chemically changed so much that they can not will themselves to quit and must be treated as though they have a medical disease. NO: Alva Noe states that addiction is not a disease of the brain. First, he points that not all addictions are chemical substances and there are many activities that can be addictive to people.
The psychodynamic theory of offending believes criminality is caused by abnormal development of the psyche. The theory explains criminality happening for 4 different reasons, first being a weak superego as it doesn't punish them for acting on impulses from the id, second being a deviant superego as it has deviant values so doesn't react to certain crimes, third being a strong superego as they commit a crime to be punished to rid the guilt imposed by the superego or they suppress so much anger and frustration that one day they 'explode' releasing it in one go, and forth being maternal deprivation (proposed by Bowlby) as it leads to affectionless psychopathy so they can't form meaningful relationships. A major problem with the psychodynamic theory is that the concepts are difficult to test, and it relies on the unconscious mind which is impossible to prove meaning there is no empirical evidence. The biological approach can also be argued as difficult to test or proved because the CNS, ANS and endocrine system are very complex and interact with each other in a complex way, and because of this they are still not completely understood. The biological research is arguably better than the psychodynamic research because it relies on quantitative and objective data which will be interpreted the same by
Outline and evaluate the biological approaches to causes of abnormality (12marks) The biological approach to abnormality sees mental disorders as caused by abnormal physiological processes such as genetic and biochemical factors. The physical features of the causes of a mental disorder according to the biological approach suggest that abnormality could be affected by brain damage. Abnormal behaviour may occur if the brain’s structure is damaged in some way. Once the disease or brain damage has caused the mental deterioration there is nothing can really be done to stop the damage going any further. Extreme use of alcohol and other drugs can damage the brain and can sometimes cause hallucinations or other symptoms of a mental disorder but is only usually caused by excessive use of alcohol and drugs.
Volkow gave Ritalin to a group of participants he found that some of the participents enjoyed the experience while others didn’t. He conducted brain scans and found that those who enjoyed the feeling brought on by Ritalin had fewer dopamine receptor. there is research that contradicts the genetic explanation of addiction. Comings found the DRD2 gene present in individual with autism. This is a weakness as it contradict the idea of the DRD2 gene being a reward gene as individuals with autism aren’t seen to be pleasure seeking.
Critical Point 3: There is a flaw with one of the key pieces of evidence to support the dopamine hypothesis. The drugs used to treat schizophrenia by blocking the dopamine receptors can actually increases it as neurons struggle to compensate for the sudden deficiency. Haracz, in a review of post-mortem studies of schizophrenics, found that most of those studied who showed elevated dopamine levels had received antipsychotic drugs shortly before death, unlike post-mortem of schizophrenics who hadn’t received medication these results showed that these individuals had normal levels of dopamine. Therefore, this evidence weakens the support for the dopamine
The untrained individuals would look at psychopathology as being a study of mental disorders on the mere manifestation of different behaviors. However, we in the field of psychology would determine what is by going through the basics. It is commonly referred to as abnormal psychology which is the clear understanding of nature, certain treatments, and the many different causes. There are several ways in fact to where individuals in the field of psychology may use to explain psychology. For example, one psychologist may use descriptive psychopathology to which will strive to provide answers for symptoms or mental illness.
Another way of personalizing the scripts of clients is permissive and authoritarian these are two general recognized style of hypnotic induction. The traditional hypnotherapists like Hull and Freud had numerous failing with clients using the authoritative style however this does not mean that it does not altogether work. The common thing that both Hull and Freud had in the methods was that they used the same style on all the clients. Both Hull and Freud did not make any effort to personalize the induction to suit each of the clients however the hypnotherapist Erickson was more successful with in his therapy the reason for it was because the permissive style was a much more gentle approach and took into consideration the clients wants and needs and Erickson was quite aware of the individual differences of his clients and showed importance to building rapport with them so he received much more of a response and co-operation from the clients. The permissive style is nurturing and provides an internal environment of choice but safety.
The abnormality lies mainly in the pathway linking the frontal lobes of the cerebral cortex with the basal ganglia. The frontal lobes are responsible for deliberation and judgement (thinking), while the basal ganglia act as a relay station in the planning and execution of movements (behaviour). PET Scans of patients with active symptoms of OCD show heightened activity in parts of the frontal cortex known as the Orbital frontal cortex (OFC). Obsessive and compulsive symptoms can be caused by a loss of tissue in the caudate nuclei, areas in the basal ganglia that filter messages coming from the OFC before passing the more important ones to other parts of the brain. Researchers suspect that the caudate nuclei form perform this selection function poorly with those with OCD.
The guilty-but mentally-ill verdict fails to uphold this principle, and even though it mandates treatment for offenders, there is no indication that the treatment for offenders that are mentally ill has improved since the verdict was established. The APA supports the standard for legal insanity which involves a lack of appreciating the wrong behavior due to a mental issue. The APA is hesitant on taking a position on the assignment of the burden of proof in insanity cases, since this is a matter for legislative judgment and further empirical study. When it comes to psychiatric testimony, the APA supports allowing testimony about the offenders’ mental state, diagnosis, and motivation at the time of the criminal act, leaving the decision of legal insanity up to the jury or judge. The APA stands behind the special management of release decisions for people that are not guilty by reason of insanity in cases that involve violent behavior.
Researchers confirmed that “it didn’t take repeated exposures—“the vast majority” of subjects reported only one” instance of exposure to gun violence (Holden). Psychologist Jeanne Brooks-Gunn of Columbia University even went as far as stating “a single exposure might have a profound effect, even on a hitherto nonviolent individual” (Holden). However, Holden addresses the doubts of the study of some knowledgeable scholars. There are concerns that the study does not accurately demonstrate that the violence in media provokes nonviolent adolescents to become violent, but rather reveals a relationship between subjects who “already had some violence risk factors” and violent behavior. All in all, Holden identifies that undeniable fact that there is a relationship when children are exposed to violence in media—whether or not it is as significant as shown in the study is to be measured with more subjects and more accurate