posted
I can't believe how much this is bothering me.
quote:until the psychosis grew and expanded until he snapped the day of the massacre.
It wasn't a day. He bought the first gun a month before. It wasn't one day or one moment and then an impulse move. This was planned and was sought to be justified. It sure looks like he knew exactly what he was doing.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
He also made a number of choices -- including avoiding/refusing treatment that had been strongly advised -- that led up to the day in question. Someone who repeatedly resists treatment for their mental illness and makes advance complex and self-glorifying plans to kill people certainly fits my definition of evil.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:You don't know that. Especially if it raised awareness about mental health and not in a negative way. I think that's incredibly relevant.
Do you really think airing this footage will "raise awareness about mental health"? Everyone I've spoken to who has seen it says something very close to, "@!#$ing nuts!" The footage isn't raising awareness at all in the public, it's titilation.
Shown in classrooms? Sure. Reviewed by mental health professionals everywhere? You betcha. Shown to teachers, perhaps, as a sort of warning-sign guideline? Sure, maybe. Shown for a ratings glut on national news media? No way.
Exactly what awareness is raised by airing this footage that didn't already exist? That some people are really, really, really screwed up in the head? That some people feel random murder is an acceptable outlet to their suffering? We already know these things as a society. We don't learn anything new from seeing this sort of footage.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: This story about Librescu made me cry this morning. Every time we have these tragedies, we seem to hear something of the best of humanity coming even of the worst of humanity. I think these stories get told not just in memory of the people who so acted, but because such action restores hope in us a little bit. And that's not a bad thing.
Hearing about Librescu brought tears to my eyes as well.
It's such a pity that some of the most remarkable qualities of humanity- bravery, compassion, self sacrifice- sometimes make themselves most brilliantly manifest just before the person displaying them is lost.
And to survive the Nazis, only to die in this fashion... <sigh>
I said a prayer for him. Nothing more to do.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, that's the thing. Okay, maybe some more people will become aware of some "warning signs" or will think that mental health is more important. At the same time though, it'll be in an incredibly negative light and would add to the (already sizable) stigma of mental illness. So I really don't see any good coming out of it.
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: What is the value in formulating completely untestable medical diagnoses of dead people?
Even if I were formulating completely untestable medical diagnoses of dead people, I'd be able to name more than a few reasons why such analysis could prove useful.
But I'm not doing that. I'm guessing at what personality disorders he WAS diagnosed with when he was previously detained in a mental facility after being deemed a danger to himself and others.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm guessing at what personality disorders he WAS diagnosed with when he was previously detained in a mental facility after being deemed a danger to himself and others.
And do you have any way to test those guesses? And why would they be useful?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Understanding other people is always useful. Even when they are dead, understanding why someone does what he does would help you understand people you may interact with in the future.
Failing to try to understand others leads to shallow and false interpretations of their actions - such as "he's just doing that because he's evil." It leads one to fail to appreciate others too. And that, in turn, leads to bad judgement - because your predictions about how others will react are based in your understanding of why they act, and because your moral judgement depends on the degree to which you value other people.
So, I would say understanding what personality disorders may have influenced this killer's behavior is a useful thing to know.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:And do you have any way to test those guesses?
I'd figure the answer to this one would be easy? His psychiatric file will be discussed publicly in the future. Officials will release further information on his mental health and this will be stuff that was drawn up conclusively by mental health experts who had to diagnose him while he was being held in a mental institution, so it's not postmortem conjecture. There will be a profile on the psychological knowns of Cho much as there has been exhaustively categorized and discussed mental profiles for all other memorable mass murderers.
Is the information useful? Sure. It's not relevant to my conjecture since I'm just making a guess for the hell of it, but the information will be useful. People who commit acts this shocking do get researched in depth for good reason, part of that occuring in the hopes that future incidents can be potentially avoided; civic policy and school policy will change to accommodate what Cho's history brings to light.
Even without supposed usefulness, assuming you want to discount it as being speculative on my part, it's still informative. He becomes a psychological case study. At absolutely any rate, the kind of study and review I'm talking is inarguably more useful and productively applicable than just arguing about whether or not he was 'evil.'
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting news is already filtering down the news pipelines. Apparently, a review of his history is showing that he's a 'prototypical' textbook example of a shooter, something which probably comes as little surprise to criminologists.
More news: he was diagnosed with autism at age 8, after an analysis which was prompted by his emotional coldness and refusal to talk.
It is possible that you will see a degree of 'slipped through the cracks' discussion, since his parents were apparently unable or unwilling to get special help with his mental and social problems, which (it can be assumed) went untreated:
quote:Other relatives admitted Cho's parents had always been aware of his problems but had neither the time nor money for specialist help.
His uncle Chan Kim, 56, said: "He wasn't like a normal kid. We were worried about him not talking.
"Both his parents knew he had mental problems but they were poor and they couldn't send him to a special hospital in the United States.
"His mother and sister were asking his friends to help instead.
"His parents worked and did not have time to look after his condition and didn't give him special treatment.
"They had no time or money to look after his special problem even though they knew he was autistic."
And the members of Cho's family that have as of yet talked to the media are not mincing their words:
quote:THE grandfather of Cho Seung-Hui said yesterday: "Son of a bitch. It serves him right he died with his victims."
Kim Hyang-Sik, 82, said he had a doom-laden dream of Cho's parents the night of his murderous rampage - and woke to hear the news of the massacre and his grandson's death.
He watched Cho's sick video of himself holding a gun to his head.
His sister Kim Yang-Sun, 85, who also saw it, told the Mirror that afterwards her brother was so distraught he had "gone away for a few days to calm himself down and avoid more questions".
She too repeatedly referred to the killer as "son of a bitch" or "a***hole" and said his mother Kim Hyang-Yim had problems with him from infancy.
quote:I'm guessing at what personality disorders he WAS diagnosed with when he was previously detained in a mental facility after being deemed a danger to himself and others.
This isn't what happened. You are speculating here (1) that he was diagnosed, (2) that he was considered a danger to others, and (3) what that yet-unknown-to-exist diagnosis was.
Those are a lot of assumptions, and I don't think ANY of them happened. There has been considerable evidence that none of those did. As far as we know he was put in the hospital for being suicidal (not a because of being a danger to others), we do not know that he was diagnosed with anything, and we do know that he was released which I don't think happens unless it is judged that he was not a danger.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
If he was held at the psychiatric facility only briefly, there may not be an official diagnosis, or if they did have to come up with something to put on the release paperwork it may not be a correct one. I don't think we're ever likely to know exactly what his disorder was, in clinical terms.
Posts: 957 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:This isn't what happened. You are speculating here (1) that he was diagnosed, (2) that he was considered a danger to others, and (3) what that yet-unknown-to-exist diagnosis was.
On the account of (3), you're wrong when you say that this isn't 'what happened.' I say "I am doing Y." You are responding 'This isn't what happened, you are clearly doing Y.' Here is a repeat of my post with emphasis:
quote: I'm going to make a rudimentary guess: he will turn out to have a diagnosis of paranoid personality disorder and possibly also borderline personality disorder.
I am speculating openly and I have never claimed otherwise! It's possible he was detained only as a danger to himself OR others, but either way he was detained as a danger! A magistrate signed the order after finding ample probable cause to believe that he was, at the time, a danger. This is an official and legal process, without which detention is not legal.
quote:Those are a lot of assumptions, and I don't think ANY of them happened. There has been considerable evidence that none of those did.
This brings up that (1) and (2) are not speculation. You are factually incorrect. He was ordered to undergo outpatient care *and* he had prescription medications said to be related to treatment of psychological problems, so that meant that he was diagnosed with something.
I'm taking a stab at it based on the input of his plays and videos. My guess is a paranoid personality disorder was at least suspected, or can otherwise be reasonably concluded. This is not an expert conclusion, This is a guess!
I am confused by the reaction to this. I don't think I was particularly unclear!
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Being recommended for counseling does NOT mean that a diagnosis is automatically given. It's clear that he refused care and refused any treatment, much less long-term treatment.
Anyway, I don't actually disagree with your guess - I don't know enough about it, but it certainly seems to fit. My point is that it is not a clear line from paranoid personality disorder to mudering over 30 people and expecting the general public to blame themselves for it.
When it comes to the evil vs. bonkers debate, I don't think it is either/or. I think it took both.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Being recommended for counseling does NOT mean that a diagnosis is automatically given. It's clear that he refused care and refused any treatment, much less long-term treatment.
No, no. That's certainly not clear as stated. He had prescriptions for a mental issue, which means that he was diagnosed with something, unless somehow it is possible to receive psych drugs to treat a disorder you haven't actually been diagnosed with. It is possible they were just depression drugs, but that still requires a diagnosis.
I'm also not talking at all about his being recommended for counseling, I'm talking about how he was released from being detained at a mental facility with orders for outpatient care. Care for something that should require a diagnosis, barring a very confusing policy.
But your point isn't something I'm actually opposing. I don't think there's a 'clear line' from any personality disorder to mass murder, nor do I think I'll be involving myself with any debate about what the public has to 'blame' themselves for.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Being recommended for outpatient care doesn't mean he ever went back to get it, and psychiatrists are pretty pill-happy; I could definitely see one writing a prescription with only the most tenuous of preliminary diagnoses.
Posts: 957 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe that the outpatient care was under orders.
According to ABC News, Cho was evaluated by a psychiatrist and the order for outpatient treatment included a finding that Cho was a danger. Under federal law, Cho was officially prohibited from purchasing firearms because he had been adjudicated mentally defective, even though he had not been committed full-time to the cuckoo ward. I think that it is pretty clear that there was a diagnosis.
His story and his peculiar mannerisms in his video indicate a pretty demented kid and I can only guess that they point to an avoidant, paranoid personality. He also seems to have a complete lack of empathy, but that's almost a given based on the fact that he did, after all, go on a sadistic killing rampage.
And schizophrenia was also mentioned. It's possible. He could have very well been experiencing his initial psychotic break, since he was about at the age that they develop. Though even with the video, that may end up being guesswork even for real experts.
That prescription care was part of an official and legal diagnosis made after a period of detention and evaluation due to mental concerns. The kid had history. I cannot imagine that the prescription can be written off as a tenuous preliminary diagnosis.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Being recommended for counseling does NOT mean that a diagnosis is automatically given. It's clear that he refused care and refused any treatment, much less long-term treatment.
No, no. That's certainly not clear as stated. He had prescriptions for a mental issue, which means that he was diagnosed with something, unless somehow it is possible to receive psych drugs to treat a disorder you haven't actually been diagnosed with. It is possible they were just depression drugs, but that still requires a diagnosis.
It's completely possible to receive treatment without an official diagnosis. It's completely possible to receive medication for a LONG TIME without an official diagnosis.
Edit: It doesn't have much to do with pill-happiness, IMO. It has a lot more to do with the fact that diagnosing a mental illness is usually a lot trickier than diagnosing, I don't know, ringworm.
posted
Ummmm. I guess you could totally be right. If it's possible for a person to get a prescription for the treatment of a mental disorder .. without a diagnosis for that mental disorder .. then, that's kinda crazy and I'll wonder why that's allowed.
But while I'm busy being totally confused about that, I'll hope I've got enough left to stand on. He was ordered to seek care in the terms of his release from unwilling custody. He was ruled to be a 'mental defective' and a danger. I dunno if this is all possible without a diagnosis? I can only still assume that they do imply a necessary diagnosis?
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's actually harder to get information now. After plastering the crap that was sent to NBC all over the front page and newscasts, it looks like the backlash was so strong that everything about the shooter has been taken off the front page at all.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: No, no. That's certainly not clear as stated. He had prescriptions for a mental issue, which means that he was diagnosed with something, unless somehow it is possible to receive psych drugs to treat a disorder you haven't actually been diagnosed with.
I don't know if it's possible to get prescribed for nothing, but it's definitely possible to get prescribed odd drugs for seemingly unrelated problems: powerful anti-depression, anti-anxiety drugs as sleep aids, etc.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Ummmm. I guess you could totally be right. If it's possible for a person to get a prescription for the treatment of a mental disorder .. without a diagnosis for that mental disorder .. then, that's kinda crazy and I'll wonder why that's allowed.
Like pH said, diagnosis of mental illness is way, way more complicated than diagnosis of physical problems. It can literally take years to pin down, and usually requires trying several different medications before finding one (or a combination) that will work well enough. Often the way a patient reacts to a particular medication can actually be part of the diagnostic process. And because they can't keep people locked up for years while they figure out what's wrong with them, frequently all they can do is prescribe one or more drugs to treat the immediate acute symptoms and hope the person will stick with the care process long enough to get a firm diagnosis--if someone truly does not want to receive mental health care, and can convince the right people that they aren't a danger to others, it's very hard to compel them.
Posts: 957 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Ummmm. I guess you could totally be right. If it's possible for a person to get a prescription for the treatment of a mental disorder .. without a diagnosis for that mental disorder .. then, that's kinda crazy and I'll wonder why that's allowed.
But while I'm busy being totally confused about that, I'll hope I've got enough left to stand on. He was ordered to seek care in the terms of his release from unwilling custody. He was ruled to be a 'mental defective' and a danger. I dunno if this is all possible without a diagnosis? I can only still assume that they do imply a necessary diagnosis?
I seriously doubt 'mental defective' was the term used, and if so it was used wrongly. He was diagnosed as a possible danger to himself and others, but believe it or not this is not as rare a diagnosis as you might think. This is a diagnosis that usually comes along with an assessment that a person might be suicidal whether by a preexisting condition or due to circumstances (like PTSD). Mental health just is not at a stage where a diagnosis of someone unwilling to cooperate with the person doing the treatment is going to be accurate. The pharmacological aspect is even more of a guessing game, because different medicines affect people in different ways, dependant on their own chemistry and the actual nature of their problem. It is not uncommon, I hear, for doctors to go through one or two prescriptions before finding one that has the right balance of helpful ability and lack of side effects. It is similar (in my view) to pain regulation, where the doctor tries to find the prescription that offers the most relief with the fewest adverse effects on the patient, relying on the patient's honest and open response to the medication to figure out what works and what doesn't.
What I am trying to express is that it is not a simple checklist that a physician can go over and assess the patient. This is why psychiatry and psychology are separate studies from general practice or other specialized medicine. It isn't as simple as being able to say, "yes, he's crazy. The kind of crazy that could lead to shooting people."
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to say that I'm pretty uncomfortable with all of the speculation, mostly because I don't see how it's valuable. Few of us, if any, are experts in any of the fields this situation covers. And even if we were, we don't have access to all the information and likely will never have access to all of it. What we have to rely on is the reports from the media, and many of those are still conflicting and I've seen several that are extremely misleading, if not out and out lies. So how can any of us form any meaningful speculation based on that?
Posts: 959 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the killer CHOSE to be mentally ill, then that gives him no more of an excuse than if he chose to be drunk. As long as choice is involved, moral accountability is also involved. The killer chose to go over to the dark side. Making this choice always results in mental illness. But it is a symptom of evil, not the cause of it; otherwise it would be an excuse for evil. Maybe his habitual choices to embrace the dark side over the past months and years of his life were the real cause of any mental illness that was detected in him at any time. Such choices tend to be progressive, spiralling further and further out of control into ever greater excesses of evil, until a kind of "critical mass" is reached, where the person explodes into violence.
This is reality, even if much of modern thought in psychology seeks to explain it away.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I seriously doubt 'mental defective' was the term used
The definition of a "mental defective" includes anyone whom "a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority" has determined to be "a danger to himself or other" because of "marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease."
He was detained for analysis and observation by a magistrate that had determined that there was probable cause that he was a danger to himself or others.
When in the mental facility, the experts there had him adjudicated mentally defective, and this was detailed in the terms of his eventual release.
When one is 'adjudicated' as a mental defective due to safety concerns prompted by Cho's stalking -- as unsavory as the wording is -- this is apparently an official declaration of confirmed mental illness.
By definition and law it apparently necessarily implies that the person is either (a) a danger to themselves or others, or (b) are unable to manage their own affairs due to a lack of mental capacity.
In the case of Cho's diagnosis, (a) clearly applied and the state had determined that Cho was mentally ill.
So, unfortunately, we've got that kind of classy, classy language still in our legal system.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would like people to look at the third post in my Fox News thread because it talks about an aspect of this story that I would really like people to state their views on .
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Oh, I definitely don't want to go into "people are mentally ill because they choose to be" territory. That's not a good idea.
posted
Yes, I know. But if he deliberately copied one pose from one movie, he might have deliberately copied another pose from another movie.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Yes, I know. But if he deliberately copied one pose from one movie, he might have deliberately copied another pose from another movie.
Not to mention that there is plenty of Anime that predates Woo that certainly emphasizes the same things the article outlines. I very much doubt Woo has never been exposed to anime.
This theory could be much more valid if just a few seconds of his spree had been caught on tape.
The differences between the sheer brutality and violence of Harris and Klebold with their pipe bombs, rifles and shotguns seems quite different then Cho's pistols with their finesse and fluidity.
But thats just my two cents.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
And though she may not have been nearby I find it extraordinary that, Regina Rohde a survivor of the Columbine shootings also survived this shooting.
It is to be wondered how she feels about the American schooling system.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Paranoid schizophrenia does not lead someone to shoot 32 innocent people.
Doesn't it? Conceivably I am harbouring a stereotype, but it seems to me that this is actually a fairly perfect description of the kind of thing that paranoid schizophrenia does lead to.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Paranoid schizophrenia does not lead someone to shoot 32 innocent people.
Doesn't it? Conceivably I am harbouring a stereotype, but it seems to me that this is actually a fairly perfect description of the kind of thing that paranoid schizophrenia does lead to.
You are right KOM, schizophrenia also lead to a woman drowning her 5 children. This shooting is not beyond the realm of possibility. But I am not sure this kid had schizophrenia. Mental ilnesses always seem to get all lumped together. 'messianic complex paranoid schizophrenic.'
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
The Wachowski brothers themselves have stated their influences from Asian cinema, in particular to the "blood opera" genre that John Woo himself introduced in movies like The Killer, Hard Boiled, and several other movies in his early days, and even more recently Face/Off and The Replacement Killers (although they're more influenced by American culture).
The Matrix simply made it more mainstream and "cool" in American culture. The Matrix also has lots of anime influence, whereas Woo's early work really doesn't.
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:THE grandfather of Cho Seung-Hui said yesterday: "Son of a bitch. It serves him right he died with his victims."
...
She too repeatedly referred to the killer as "son of a bitch" or "a***hole" and said his mother Kim Hyang-Yim had problems with him from infancy.
Sounds like a charming family. Who, no matter how angry they are, refers to their grandson as a "son of a bitch?" For obvious reasons, that particular usage is normally avoided.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
It "serves him right" that he killed himself?
If cops cranked a couple of hundred rounds in to him, perhaps, but I hardly see suicide as someone getting what they deserve.
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: I now know 2 people who won't be going back to class. Met them at an engineering party.
Anyway--thanks for all support from Hatrack. You guys have been a huge part of my life for the past year.
I'm so sorry to hear two of your friends are dead. One of my older sister's high school friends was also among those killed. He was an engineering grad student.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom/Nighthawk: Remember something is most likely lost in the translation when you go from Korean to English. For all we know he was saying,
"Serves him right that he died along with the people he killed."
As in he deserved to die for killing them.
Even when somebody speaks English as a second language, they still tend to articulate their thoughts into Korean and then translate them into English words.
Nighthawk: I am not sure why you call it the "Akimbo pose". I'd welcome illumination. The Wachowski brothers did also cite Asian cinema and John Woo as influences, you are right in this. Why must they be influenced by one or the other? Anime writers watch movies, and Movie writers read manga and watch anime.
I don't think anyone has a firm handle on what influences Cho would say shaped his actions and the manner in which they were carried out.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:And though she may not have been nearby I find it extraordinary that, Regina Rohde a survivor of the Columbine shootings also survived this shooting.
It is to be wondered how she feels about the American schooling system.
Ergh.
"What does graduation entail? Do I upgrade to surviving office shootings?"
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
akimbo = wielding two similar weapons, usually pistols, in both hands simultaneously
That isn't the original meaning of the word "akimbo", but it is a common usage now among gamers and action-movie enthusiasts.
Posts: 1539 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Puppy: akimbo = wielding two similar weapons, usually pistols, in both hands simultaneously
That isn't the original meaning of the word "akimbo", but it is a common usage now among gamers and action-movie enthusiasts.
...really? I've never heard that before.
Edit: Urban Dictionary says your definition is not only the most popular, but also the "oldest" and "original."
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is an earlier definition that means "with elbows pointed outwards", but it's far less common. And definitely not used colloquially.
Posts: 1539 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
