What is Antisocial Personality Disorder?

There are many misconceptions concerning antisocial personality disorder that have been circulating amongst not only laypeople, but professionals as well. Often, the terms "sociopath" or "psychopath" come to mind, as this disorder is usually associated with criminals, dictators and other much-despised members of society. Individuals suffering from this disorder often encounter discrimination, even within the mental health network, as this disorder and its symptoms present many challenges for treatment.

Because this disorder is highly associated with deviance and criminal behaviour, I felt that the hard labeling theory (which will be discussed in detail) would be the best approach for analysis, as it deals with societal labeling that may exacerbate the symptoms of this disorder. I favour this particular theory because it emphasizes seeing deviance from the viewpoint of the "deviant" individual.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (American Psychiatric Association, 1994, pp. 649-650) describes antisocial personality disorder as a persistent pattern of disrespect for and violation of the rights of others, as indicated by three (or more) of the following: an inability to conform to social norms by engaging in unlawful behaviour; repeated lying for personal benefit or pleasure; impulsivity; extreme irritability and aggressiveness, shown by repeated physical fights or assaults; recklessness towards others and even oneself, especially repeated irresponsibility; and finally, a lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt someone else (Hare et al, 1991).

I chose to look at antisocial personality disorder by studying the sociological implications of labeling theory and how individuals are branded as "deviant". Howard Becker, who was one of the first interaction theorists, wrote that gsocial groups create deviance by making the rules as to whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labeling them as outsiders. From this point of view, deviance is not a quality of the act the person commits, but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an "offender" (Becker 1964).

Once an individual has been exposed to such labeling, there is an increased likelihood that they will travel down the road of "deviancy" and will have difficulties ridding him/herself of this label and will internalize the label that society has given to them. Thus, there is a tendency to continue to behave that way simply because that behavior is what society now expects. The labeling theory raises the argument of nature vs. nurture: are certain individuals genetically predisposed to deviance at birth or, are they influenced by their environment?

This individual will then feel as if his/her deviancy has been confirmed by social reaction, and may come to believe that it is useless to even try to get rid of such a label. The social processes that objectively label individuals as deviants, change societyfs perception of the individual as well as the individual's perception of himself. In fact, researchers are convinced that labels only serve to exacerbate the behavior that prompted the label in the first place. By treating the individual as a deviant, the individual begins to see herself or himself as a deviant, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

This theory is often criticized for siding with the "villain", of trying to justify "wrong" behaviours, and by undermining conventional morality. Becker, in response, acknowledged that individuals with antisocial personality disorder do contribute to the corrosion of society, be it consciously or otherwise. However, because of his background as a sociologist, he must take into account the involvement of mental illness and must honour the individual's right to receive help and understanding.

The labeling theory allows a ghumanizationh of the individual, giving him/her a chance to be seen as just another human being who is dealing with problems of identity and surviving in a subculture of "deviancy". Obviously, deviant personalities do not develop overnight. Usually, there is an initial act, perhaps as a young adolescent, that deviates from normal or socially acceptable behavior, such as stealing an orange. This act results in reactions from the immediate social environment since it represents a violation of social norms. The social reaction would often involve some measure of reprimand and, despite warnings, other deviant acts and reactions will continue to occur as the resultant punishment or admonition may very well be the reaction that provokes a sense of unfairness, victimization and, ultimately, deviant retaliation. Eventually, the individual will begin to use deviant behavior as a means of defense, attack, or response to the corrective reaction that the initial behavior provoked. In addition to this, however, one must keep in mind that domestic disturbances such as divorce, neglect, abuse, deviant parents, and general familial conflict, are significant determinants of the deviant behavior of the offspring.

In addition, there is the undeniable truth that certain individuals are more susceptible to being labeled, such as non-whites and those of lower socio-economic status. It seems to be that opportunity plays a large part in whether or not one is labeled as "deviant", such as a poor black male who gets arrested for robbery who must accept his prison sentence as opposed to the wealthy white doctor who repeated engages in malpractice but because of his status in society, is immune to discovery.

However, labeling theory leaves out important discussions about etiology and biology, such as genetic influences, findings of a decrease in prefrontal gray matter in individuals with ASPD, and evidence of decreased autonomic nervous system responsiveness and serotonin deficiencies. In addition, it has been found that concordance rates for anti-social traits is more than twice as much for monozygotic than in dizygotic twins. There seems to be a lack of empirical evidence, and therefore, isnft viewed as a scientific theory (Scheff, 1974).

My basic premise is that the labeling theory allows for one to look at "deviant" behaviour in the context of social norms. In looking at a disorder that is marked by patterns of violent, criminal, or unethical and exploitative behavior and an inability to feel affection for others, it provides a space for discussion of the contributions of societal expectations on an individual. However, this theory does not give us a full explanation of this disorder, such as the intrinsic biological factors involved, but rather shows how individuals with a propensity towards displaying the mentioned characteristic can be trapped by the labels that have been strapped onto them.

REFERENCES

Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press.

Hare, Robert, et al (1991). Psychopathy and the DSM-IV Criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder. American Psychological Association 100:391-398.

Scheff, T.J. (1964). The Labeling Theory of Mental Illness. American Sociological Review 39:444-52.