Recent news of killings of minors at the hands of their fathers have raised a lot of questions about the way our society functions
The killing of children by their own fathers has stirred a wave of shock in the country. Their homicidal acts have left behind a number of questions:
Can a husband kill his wife?
Can a father kill his children, too?
Can such episodes be forecast?
How should mothers equip themselves and their children to face such catastrophic incidents?
What are the characteristic features of a murdering father?
Can a man behave like an aggressive animal?
What will be the fate of single-parent children after this disaster?
What will be the impact of the violence when it is exposed through hourly bulletins in mass media?
Are such acts, the precursor towards the emergence of a culture of violence?
In all these episodes, the homicidal acts took place at the murderers homes. The killer was the victims patron, the father. The weapons used were conventional household devices available in every kitchen. The victims were small children who could never apprehend such an attack. Apparently there were no overt precursors or warnings. They were attacked in broad daylight during the general working hours of the community. The killers were habitually using Gutka and beetlenut with varying or unknown admixtures. The wives or the mothers of children were rendered incapable either by virtue of their absence from the home or killed instantly in the first go. The killers looked composed and calm.
In one case, the killer repeatedly viewed proceedings of homicidal events on the television with interest, as if modelling for a violent behaviour.
Usually aggressive behaviour arouse feelings of anxiety in the aggressor, particularly if he observes the injurious consequences of his actions thereby inhibiting further aggression. But in these instances the effect on aggressive behaviour can be explained without resorting to the notion that an aggressive drive is being reduced. In all these instances there was no sign of deliberate self-harm dismissing the probability of a clinically depressed person indulging in homicide followed by suicide.
Aggression and violence occur in many clinical situations ranging from alcohol and addictive drugs to physical changes in brain to childhood abuse to severe mental derangement to developmental disabilities to chronic antisocial acts when the balance collapses between impulses and internal control violence breaks out. People may have violent thoughts or fantasies, but unless they lose control, thoughts do not become acts. In other words, cumulative anger in the absence of aggression releasing stimuli may cause spontaneous eruption of aggression as a learned behaviour.
The aggressive behaviour has been correlated to age, sex, personal interests and the duration of the exposure to films focusing on violence. Boys as young as eight years of age are most susceptible more so when they constantly watch violence on TV, unless consistently prevented to imitate these acts by parents or peers. Girls, however, tend to isolate themselves from such activities unless especially motivated. Other factors that instigate aggression include poverty, overcrowding, actions of authorities such as policemen, the values of ones subgroup within the society etc.
A number of hormones and addictive drugs have been held responsible for aggressive impulses. A metabolite of a neurotransmitter, serotonion, 5H1AA has been found to be deficient in victims of suicide and persons committing homicide. Presence of an extra Y
Chromosome XYY has been attributed to aggressive behaviour with other clinical and psychiatric symptoms.
Lunar influence on the frequency of homicides may exist. Data on all homicides occurring in Dada county, Florida during a 15-year period (1949 cases) were compared with similar data from Cuyahoga Country, Ohio (2033 cases). Two peaks were noted: first, starting 24 hours after the new moon, the cases in the next 24-hour period approached significance. Then starting 48 hours after the full moon, the cases in the next 24 hours also approached significance.
Exposure to noxious odours such as those produced by chemical plants and other industries may increase personal irritability if odours are truly foul; aggression appears to decrease because escaping from the unpleasant environment becomes a dominant goal for those involved. Similarly loud and irritating noise and unexplained physical pain may contribute to stronger assaults.
The mental picture behind such killers can be tracked on a continuum starting from annoyance to violence, with several steps in between such as anger, angry outbursts, threatening displays, domestic violence, verbal taunts, intense frustration, explosive impulses and eventually self destructive behaviour etc.
Ethnologists who study animal behaviour in naturalistic settings have described aggressive behaviour both in animals and men as innately instinctual. But animals have learnt to control their aggressive impulses whereas man has not. The flesh eaters or carnivorous kill members of the other species. Among their own species the motives behind such fights are competition for food, mates, nesting sites or inhabited areas and protection of their young ones. Often we get to see documentaries of animals fighting in a stiglized, ritualistic pattern. Such a fight seldom results in serious injury or death.
As compared to aggression in animals, which is instinctive and can be understood to serve the purpose of species survival, human aggression is thought by some workers to be learned and is difficult to rationalize in terms of benefit species.
PREDICTORS OF DANGEROUSNESS: Commonly cited predictors of dangerousness include:
High degree of intent to harm.
Presence of a victim.
Frequent and open threats.
Concrete plan.
Access to instruments of violence.
History of loss of control.
Chronic anger, hostility or resentment.
Enjoyment in watching or inflicting harm.
Lack of compassion.
Self view as victim.
Resentful of authority.
Childhood brutality or deprivation.
Decreased warmth and affection in home.
Early loss of parent.
Fire setting, bed-wetting and cruelty to animals.
Prior violent acts.
Reckless driving.
Not good in some of the essential daily activities.
School dropout, semi-literate.
Low self-esteem.
Low I.Q.
Significant (clinical) evidence of head injury.
VICTIMS: The victims undergo a sense of helplessness, self-balance and a sense of having done something to deserve being a victim, lack of self-confidence in their judgment and competence to deal with the world. They may refuse any type of intervention and help. They develop lack of trust and lose interest in socializing. Persistent occupation with the event may reach the point of obsession. Most of the victims undergo. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) with flash-backs for a long time.
PREVENTION AND CONTROL: Social disapproval is the best form of intervention, mere punishment may not produce desired results. Recipients of punishment often interpret it as an attack against them. Strong punishments turn out to be revengeful and a role model for violence. Since the legal process takes time, the punishment loses its impact.
Humour and catharsis may contribute to the social control. Mass empathy can be safe outlets for aggression, such as competitive sports, good rapport, reduction in communication gap and remarkably developed social skills compatible with healthy human relations. Clinical cases may require drug treatment depending on the underlying morbidity.
Recent news of killings of minors at the hands of their fathers have raised a lot of questions about the way our society functions
