Friend Can't Keep Animals Alive!

[zzGypsy]

No one is taking it lightly as far as I know. I'm simply not cool with calling an apple and orange. See it way to often.

right, exactly. [sociopathic] and [issues with impulse control] are different things. both matter, however prognosis and tactics for addressing them are different between the two. they share some generally apparent behavior, but in detail, the behavior is not the same, nor are the motivations. popular media and the nightly news have make everyone familiar with [sociopath] but not so much with [impulse control issues], although I'm fairly certain its much the more common problem.

and as always, it's armchair psych since we're 3rd party, on a typed observation, by a non-clinical observer, on the internet.

been enjoying reading your well-informed and well-articulated posts on the subject. excercising my own armchair psych degree, I think you're spot on.

 

[punk-a-doodle]

Quote: Absolutely a vital point to remember, especially for the OP as she works through this. Better worded than I managed yet again, Gypsy. XD

 

[redhen]

Yep, we are each entitled to our own opinions... thats ALL they are,.. opinions..
NONE of us, (cept the OP) has even met the kid... so tis just a bunch of talk and personal opinions..

 

[punk-a-doodle]

Yep, it's just good to know what the opinions are based on, and how they relate to current understanding of labels being used. For example, the opinion that "Spot the dog is an alien from outer space" may not be as fully realized as the opinion that "Spot the dog is an Australian cattle dog, and here are the standards outlining what that means".

 

[redhen]

Yep, it's just good to know what the opinions are based on, and how they relate to current understanding of labels being used. For example, the opinion that "Spot the dog is an alien from outer space" may not be as fully realized as the opinion that "Spot the dog is an Australian cattle dog, and here are the standards outlining what that means".

And your opinion means more than mine(and others on here)?? Because you are??....
Not trying to argue... but really neither one of us knows the whole story here.. not enough info to say either way.. sooo.. no point it going back and forth..

 

[punk-a-doodle]

Haha, that definitely is not the intent of the above. I'm not really sure how to word it in a way that is more clear. Using the term "sociopath", which is a defined term and can either be the previously mentioned general definition, or can relate to a diagnosis (again, you won't find it under the word 'sociopath' in the context of current psychology for the previously discussed reasons) that has a list of criteria, without showing an understanding of said criteria, or how they differ from similar of other groupings of disorders, means that it is probably not as solid of an opinion as it could be. It is throwing out a label without showing how you can reach that very specific conclusion from the given description.

It also seems to be an increasing trend to attribute any perceived or real failing of empathy to 'sociopathy' amongst the general public. I have my own hunches as to why this is (not limited to, but including the pop-crime TV shows and media stories Gypsy mentioned, as well as campaigns ranging from animal welfare groups to AR groups that push the idea that mistreatment of animals is a sure sign that mistreatment of humans will follow due to sociopathy), and my own worries about this trend, and what it means for greater understanding of mental health. Not really sure how else to put it, so I guess people can either take that as a statement of my superiority and godly insight...or understand that the previous posts attempt to form an explanation as to why sociopathy is not a proper label to pull from the description, and what cultural and behavioral spectrums exist that complicate an easy answer. Why 'empathy' is not limited to personal guidelines, and how this misunderstanding can hinder interpretations of such topics.

This post is trying to explain why opinions may have more backing than others, or may resist a narrow definition in favor of a broader and more inclusive look. I figure people rank the value of things for themselves, and that value isn't what I am speaking of.

Ie. If someone were to, say, post a graph or statistics showing that there has been no increase in the use of the word 'sociopathy' by the general public amid groups exposed to popular media...their post then has far more backing than my opinion. People may still choose to listen to the opinion I stated as it may make more sense to them/fit in better with their worldview/etc, but the other comment would have more backing/substance, and would help illustrate that I was too narrow in my thinking.

 

[zzGypsy]

p-doodle, can I just say...

you too redhen:

you too.

hanging out here is cool.
lots of this

and not too much of this

 

[punk-a-doodle]

Haha, I have totally just nullified your comment Gypsy!



...I mean

 

[redhen]

Haha, that definitely is not the intent of the above. I'm not really sure how to word it in a way that is more clear. Using the term "sociopath", which is a defined term and can either be the previously mentioned general definition, or can relate to a diagnosis (again, you won't find it under the word 'sociopath' in the context of current psychology for the previously discussed reasons) that has a list of criteria, without showing an understanding of said criteria, or how they differ from similar of other groupings of disorders, means that it is probably not as solid of an opinion as it could be. It is throwing out a label without showing how you can reach that very specific conclusion from the given description.

It also seems to be an increasing trend to attribute any perceived or real failing of empathy to 'sociopathy' amongst the general public. I have my own hunches as to why this is (not limited to, but including the pop-crime TV shows and media stories Gypsy mentioned, as well as campaigns ranging from animal welfare groups to AR groups that push the idea that mistreatment of animals is a sure sign that mistreatment of humans will follow due to sociopathy), and my own worries about this trend, and what it means for greater understanding of mental health. Not really sure how else to put it, so I guess people can either take that as a statement of my superiority and godly insight...or understand that the previous posts attempt to form an explanation as to why sociopathy is not a proper label to pull from the description, and what cultural and behavioral spectrums exist that complicate an easy answer. Why 'empathy' is not limited to personal guidelines, and how this misunderstanding can hinder interpretations of such topics.

This post is trying to explain why opinions may have more backing than others, or may resist a narrow definition in favor of a broader and more inclusive look. I figure people rank the value of things for themselves, and that value isn't what I am speaking of.

Ie. If someone were to, say, post a graph or statistics showing that there has been no increase in the use of the word 'sociopathy' by the general public amid groups exposed to popular media...their post then has far more backing than my opinion. People may still choose to listen to the opinion I stated as it may make more sense to them/fit in better with their worldview/etc, but the other comment would have more backing/substance, and would help illustrate that I was too narrow in my thinking.

LOL,, we are not understanding each other here!

What i am TRYING to explain to you is: I said shes a socio-path..
And you said shes NOT...
So what i am saying is REALLY neither of us has NOwhere even enough real info to say either way...
Can you 100% say i am incorrect?? Nope...
Can i say the same about your opinion?? NO way... matter of fact shes probably NOT one(but still has some serious issues)... in all reality... but ya just never know. Unless you are a psychiatrist treating the kid..

But anyways, yes, i actually do know quite a bit about socio-paths though... its my JOB to know about them.
And yes, i do know there is a certain criteria that they have to meet to be diagnosed and certain levels of that criteria also...
I also know that there are MANY different levels of so called "socio-paths"... MOST of them are NOT wacked out serial killers.. many on the "low-end" of the spectrum could be what we see in society as the petty criminals... drug dealers, pimps, thieves,.... etc.. in and out of jail.. but they dont care about you... they will steal from you and stab you, shoot you, and sell your 10 yr old kid crack, or get a hold of your debit card and empty out your account,... if it meets THEIR needs... they simply dont care that it hurts you. (those are the ones we read about every day in the local paper..)
Then theres the "high" end of the spectrum... the quiet, smart, sneaky, methodical ones that go to work Monday-Friday and church on Sundays and plan to kidnap your child that night and put her head in his fridge...
These ones are the truly scary ones, they live among us and we have noooo clue. But those are really few and far between...
Anyways, the range is sooo vast ,... thats why its so hard to actually diagnose them accurately...

I have many, many, many, hours in training about such things in working with high-risk children... Plus over 8 years living with them daily..
In order to keep my job i HAVE to have several hours in training monthly reguarding childrens behavioral issues and mental diseases..
I have worked with, closely, on a weekly basis, one of the states leading childrens psychistrist specializing in these EXACT such behaviors. I have worked with him one on one with several of my kids..
And yes, i have even lived with an actual diagnosed socio-path child... for quite a long time actually.
I have also had other un-diagnosed ones in my care, that the psychiatrists would not diagnose with that "label".. because its kinda of a no-no to do today. Unless in extreme cases..
BUT those same psychiatrists told me that THEY KNEW,in their guts, these kids were socio-paths.. but they just couldnt legally diagnosis it... but they wanted me (the care taker) to know this, and to sleep with one eye open and be aware of everything...
I have worked with every kind of behavorial issue you can imagine..
And yes, you mentioned poor impulse control... yeah, trust me, thats what many of my kids come to me with... thats usually WHY they get to my house, so i understand it quite well....
But that usually doesnt included tormenting animals (yes, throwing an animal in the pool and seeing that it terrifies it, IS tormenting it..), and no empathy when you do do something impulsive...
From what the OP said, was that her friend just shrugged her shoulders when she did that to the dog and saw it struggling in the pool...
Sure she may have impulsively tossed the dog in the pool, but her actions after that is whats concerning to me.
And trust me, if somethings like that happend with one my kids and it was reported, the psychistrists and therapists would be alllll over that situation and investigating it VERY throughly... because it IS a serious thing.
And with all her other animals dying.... welll.... not too good.
Soo, yeah i actually do have some experience in this field...
But i am FAAAAAAR from being a shrink

... And i know you read a lot of your husbands psych text books..etc... and i really do respect that!
But i also do have some real life experience in this field and many,many hours of training and learning from specialists in this field..

Is the kid a TRUE, REAL socio-path.... not likely... but something sure isnt right with her..and i highly doubt its just an impulse control issue.
She may have some tendencies to go that way though,... it sure sounds like it to me. But again, not NEARLY enough info to say really either way...
But i am still entitled to my un-educated, humble opinion....

 

[redhen]

p-doodle, can I just say...

you too redhen:

you too.

hanging out here is cool.
lots of this

and not too much of this