Given the recent thread on evil, I found this little article interesting.
FW:
By JANET McCONNAUGHEY, Associated Press Writer 
NEW ORLEANS (AP) - "Evil" is not a word most psychiatrists like. But 
some are trying to find a way to measure it. 
During a symposium Thursday at the American Psychiatric Association 
convention, Dr. Michael Welner, a forensic psychiatrist, asked more than 
120 psychiatrists to help create a depravity scale which could be used by 
the courts to judge criminals. 
Every day, judges ask juries to decide whether crimes are heinous, 
atrocious, cruel, outrageous, wanton, vile or inhuman - aggravating factors 
which can increase sentences and even lead to the death penalty in some 
states. 
But there are no universal standards to define such terms, Welner told the 
overflow audience. The interpretations often depend on judges' and 
jurors' emotions and biases, and politics or media attention can influence 
whether a prosecutor asks for execution, he said. 
In his effort to create a scale to measure depravity in defendants, Welner, 
who has testified as both a prosecution and defense witness, created a list 
of 26 indications of intent, actions and attitudes which could be used to 
rate crimes. 
Among the intents are whether the person meant to cause emotional 
trauma, cause permanent disfigurement, or terrorize or target the helpless. 
Actions include whether an attack was unrelenting or the attacker 
prolonged the victim's suffering. Attitudes include blaming the victim, 
having disrespect for the victim or taking satisfaction in the crime. 
Welner is asking judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, psychiatrists and 
theologians to go to his Web site and rate each indicator for whether they 
believe it is especially, somewhat or not at all representative of depravity. 
The object is to find indicators which all or most experts agree on, a 
"consensus morality" which could be used in court. 
Thursday's symposium, titled "How Psychiatry Defines Evil," was held on 
the final evening of the convention. 
Dr. Michael Stone of Columbia University also showed slides of nearly 
three dozen killers and others whom he considers evil. 
A woman who burned one of her three daughters alive and starved 
another to death was "at the extreme edge of evil ... one of the most 
clearly evil persons" of more than 400 whose biographies he has read, 
Stone said. 
However, he added that "the bulk of evil on a world scale is committed 
by ideologues and their followers." Wars and persecutions, from the 
Spanish Inquisition to the fighting in Bosnia, show people are capable of 
"bottomless cruelty to those outside the tribe, especially in times of 
hardship and hunger," he said. 
Welner also discussed other research that has highlighted problems with 
trying to measure depravity in criminals, primarily that some traits 
associated with people who cannibalize, mutilate or torture their victims 
also can be found in people who don't commit such crimes. 
Dr. Cleo Van Velsen, a forensic psychiatrist from London who was in the 
audience, said another challenge is determining why people commit acts 
that can be described as evil. 
"We know they exist, but not why they are produced," she said. 
Dr. John L. Young of New Haven, Conn., said he found "depravity" a 
more acceptable term than "evil." 
Trying to create a fairer, more reliable measurement for a word used in 
court is one thing, he said, but "I'm not holy enough, not saintly or godly 
enough to tamper with evil." 

Reply via email to