7 ms·

Why shouldn't his autism give him a pass? Should a person with coprolalia be found in contempt if they interrupt a judge in court? What should happen is his ca

Why shouldn't his autism give him a pass? Should a person with coprolalia be found in contempt if they interrupt a judge in court? What should happen is his caretakers should ensure he can't do the things he does. But punishing him doesn't make much sense.

mantas 4y ago
If someone can't properly control himself, then it's up to society to ensure that nobody is harmed.
- xorfish 4y ago
  Society also has to ensure, that this is done in a way that causes him as little harm as possible. It clearly failed here.
  - mantas 4y ago
    Victims should come before the perpetrator though. It's better to harm the bad actor slightly too much rather than make even more victims. Why innocent people should be at risk if somebody just can't be responsible for himself.
    - xorfish 4y ago
      I think it is wrong to value the well-being of some humans more than others.
      - mantas 4y ago
        It is wrong to do harm. Why someone's well being is more important because he has an illness? What if he hurts other vulnerable people? E.g. psycho attacking kids. Should we care about psycho's well being more than about kids safety? What if we take it the other way and kids attack mentally ill? Should we care about their well-being more, because they're kids?
tgv 4y ago
That's assuming he's dumb/stupid/retarded as well. A person with sufficient intellect and self-control is capable of suppressing such actions after a punishment. It doesn't have to be a heavy sentence, but autism by itself is not sufficient. Well, autism as it's used today. It used to be reserved for rather severe cases, but the meaning has been watered down a bit.
- Cthulhu_ 4y ago
  "watered down"? You mean it's understood better, that it's not even a scale but a series of scales of symptoms that are different for everyone, with a lot of overlap with ADHD.
  - tgv 4y ago
    > with a lot of overlap with ADHD That just shows the extent of how well it's understood. Both are a diagnosis without known cause and cure. > series of scales of symptoms So, radically altered. The label is attached to people that just register on one or two of those scales, instead of to the institutionalized that term originally referred to. If you take offense to me calling that "watered down," why don't you correct everybody who's calling it autism/autistic instead of "ASD". Anyway, the point was: autism in a modern, colloquial sense is nowhere near as invasive as in its original sense. There's no reason to assume people labeled "autistic" in the press is severely mentally handicapped to the point where they can't take responsibility for their own actions.
  - sph 4y ago
    Please stop this myth of ADHD overlap, I keep reading this everywhere. There are a lot of autistic kids misdiagnosed with ADHD, but they are not the same. In some aspects they are complete opposite. Nowhere in the ADHD definition difficulty to understand social norms or to empathise appear. They present very differently to society. I do believe that an ADHD diagnosis should not carry a reduced sentence because we are completely able to understand and see the world like neurotypical people. There is no overlap, just ignorance and misdiagnosis. Sincerely, a non-autistic ADHD person.
rnd0 4y ago
>Why shouldn't his autism give him a pass? Because it's grossly unfair to the people he hurt, that's why!
- kube-system 4y ago
  Criminal justice is not purely about retribution. Part of the value in criminal justice is also in rehabilitation and deterrence. And accomplishing those goals in a way that balances everyone’s human rights.
  - worthless-trash 4y ago
    I like how that sounds, so idealistic. I think that in some cases, the penalty can make the crime seem like a worthwhile financial transaction, I dont know about this specific case or how a disability relates to it. There are many crimes that take peoples future and damage families for generations with only a slap on the wrist enabling them to repeat the crime. I don't think there is a good solution to keep everyone happy, the best solution is just to not be involved in crimes as either the perpetrator or victim, sadly perpetrators look like regular people.
    - kube-system 4y ago
      Yes, retributive justice is very popular among the general public, particularly those affected by crime who are often the loudest voices. But it is a morally and functionally bankrupt theory of justice, which is why I will always point out that our legal system was also built on other more productive and more moral theories of justice.
      - rnd0 4y ago
        >Yes, retributive justice is very popular among the general public, particularly those affected by crime who are often the loudest voices. I know right? What scumbags! Maybe those are the people who should be locked up instead of the people going out causing the pain and suffering. /s
moonchrome 4y ago
Because he's basically predisposed to do similar shit again - that it's a condition only makes it worse. Not sure about punishment, but corrective institutionalization for sure.
somenameforme 4y ago
What happens if we take your argument to its logical extreme? Imagine we were able to definitively prove, beyond any doubt whatsoever, that all behaviors are driven entirely and completely by chemical and electrical processes within our bodies and minds. In other words that there was literally no such thing as free will. Ought we now simply drop all consequences for crime or asocial behavior in general, because the people engaging in such literally cannot stop themselves? I'm certain you don't agree with that. So the question then becomes where do we start, where do we stop, and why? And yes, I preemptively agree that the ideal goal in a society would be to rehabilitate and not punish. But getting back to the thought experiment it may ultimately even be the case that widespread rehabilitation is impossible. It'd certainly be many orders of magnitude more difficult than simply getting society to agree to not kill each other, yet that's something we're still nowhere near achieving.
- matbatt38 4y ago
  Sorry but that's a terrible argument. It is likely that there is no or at least very few free will. But that doesn't mean that nothing can be done. Care and education are not only preventive, they could also be used as an answer to criminality - even in a world without free will. Prison is known to fail at changing people who commit crimes anyway, free will or not, autistic or not: half of people who go there get arrested again in the 5 years. I'll actually follow you in taking the argument to the extreme: prison are pointless in almost every case and we should replace it with something different.
  - luckylion 4y ago
    > I'll actually follow you in taking the argument to the extreme: prison are pointless in almost every case and we should replace it with something different. If rehabilitation is their only goal. If their primary reason of existence is to keep criminals from committing further crimes against citizens, they work well. You'd just need to extend the time to make them work even better. Can't reoffend if you're behind bars (well, you can, but only against your fellow prisoners, and that might earn you solitary confinement, aka prison in prison).

mantas 4y ago

If someone can't properly control himself, then it's up to society to ensure that nobody is harmed.

xorfish 4y ago
Society also has to ensure, that this is done in a way that causes him as little harm as possible. It clearly failed here.
- mantas 4y ago
  Victims should come before the perpetrator though. It's better to harm the bad actor slightly too much rather than make even more victims. Why innocent people should be at risk if somebody just can't be responsible for himself.
  - xorfish 4y ago
    I think it is wrong to value the well-being of some humans more than others.
    - mantas 4y ago
      It is wrong to do harm. Why someone's well being is more important because he has an illness? What if he hurts other vulnerable people? E.g. psycho attacking kids. Should we care about psycho's well being more than about kids safety? What if we take it the other way and kids attack mentally ill? Should we care about their well-being more, because they're kids?

tgv 4y ago

That's assuming he's dumb/stupid/retarded as well. A person with sufficient intellect and self-control is capable of suppressing such actions after a punishment. It doesn't have to be a heavy sentence, but autism by itself is not sufficient. Well, autism as it's used today. It used to be reserved for rather severe cases, but the meaning has been watered down a bit.

Cthulhu_ 4y ago
"watered down"? You mean it's understood better, that it's not even a scale but a series of scales of symptoms that are different for everyone, with a lot of overlap with ADHD.
- tgv 4y ago
  > with a lot of overlap with ADHD That just shows the extent of how well it's understood. Both are a diagnosis without known cause and cure. > series of scales of symptoms So, radically altered. The label is attached to people that just register on one or two of those scales, instead of to the institutionalized that term originally referred to. If you take offense to me calling that "watered down," why don't you correct everybody who's calling it autism/autistic instead of "ASD". Anyway, the point was: autism in a modern, colloquial sense is nowhere near as invasive as in its original sense. There's no reason to assume people labeled "autistic" in the press is severely mentally handicapped to the point where they can't take responsibility for their own actions.
- sph 4y ago
  Please stop this myth of ADHD overlap, I keep reading this everywhere. There are a lot of autistic kids misdiagnosed with ADHD, but they are not the same. In some aspects they are complete opposite. Nowhere in the ADHD definition difficulty to understand social norms or to empathise appear. They present very differently to society. I do believe that an ADHD diagnosis should not carry a reduced sentence because we are completely able to understand and see the world like neurotypical people. There is no overlap, just ignorance and misdiagnosis. Sincerely, a non-autistic ADHD person.

rnd0 4y ago

>Why shouldn't his autism give him a pass? Because it's grossly unfair to the people he hurt, that's why!

kube-system 4y ago
Criminal justice is not purely about retribution. Part of the value in criminal justice is also in rehabilitation and deterrence. And accomplishing those goals in a way that balances everyone’s human rights.
- worthless-trash 4y ago
  I like how that sounds, so idealistic. I think that in some cases, the penalty can make the crime seem like a worthwhile financial transaction, I dont know about this specific case or how a disability relates to it. There are many crimes that take peoples future and damage families for generations with only a slap on the wrist enabling them to repeat the crime. I don't think there is a good solution to keep everyone happy, the best solution is just to not be involved in crimes as either the perpetrator or victim, sadly perpetrators look like regular people.
  - kube-system 4y ago
    Yes, retributive justice is very popular among the general public, particularly those affected by crime who are often the loudest voices. But it is a morally and functionally bankrupt theory of justice, which is why I will always point out that our legal system was also built on other more productive and more moral theories of justice.
    - rnd0 4y ago
      >Yes, retributive justice is very popular among the general public, particularly those affected by crime who are often the loudest voices. I know right? What scumbags! Maybe those are the people who should be locked up instead of the people going out causing the pain and suffering. /s

moonchrome 4y ago

Because he's basically predisposed to do similar shit again - that it's a condition only makes it worse. Not sure about punishment, but corrective institutionalization for sure.

somenameforme 4y ago

What happens if we take your argument to its logical extreme? Imagine we were able to definitively prove, beyond any doubt whatsoever, that all behaviors are driven entirely and completely by chemical and electrical processes within our bodies and minds. In other words that there was literally no such thing as free will. Ought we now simply drop all consequences for crime or asocial behavior in general, because the people engaging in such literally cannot stop themselves? I'm certain you don't agree with that. So the question then becomes where do we start, where do we stop, and why? And yes, I preemptively agree that the ideal goal in a society would be to rehabilitate and not punish. But getting back to the thought experiment it may ultimately even be the case that widespread rehabilitation is impossible. It'd certainly be many orders of magnitude more difficult than simply getting society to agree to not kill each other, yet that's something we're still nowhere near achieving.

matbatt38 4y ago
Sorry but that's a terrible argument. It is likely that there is no or at least very few free will. But that doesn't mean that nothing can be done. Care and education are not only preventive, they could also be used as an answer to criminality - even in a world without free will. Prison is known to fail at changing people who commit crimes anyway, free will or not, autistic or not: half of people who go there get arrested again in the 5 years. I'll actually follow you in taking the argument to the extreme: prison are pointless in almost every case and we should replace it with something different.
- luckylion 4y ago
  > I'll actually follow you in taking the argument to the extreme: prison are pointless in almost every case and we should replace it with something different. If rehabilitation is their only goal. If their primary reason of existence is to keep criminals from committing further crimes against citizens, they work well. You'd just need to extend the time to make them work even better. Can't reoffend if you're behind bars (well, you can, but only against your fellow prisoners, and that might earn you solitary confinement, aka prison in prison).