The day after Christmas, I got a lesson in respecting the elements. It was about 35°F, not really that cold, but there was quite a wind chill. The kids and I went to the beach to run the dog on the sand at about 3:30 in the afternoon. We got back to the van at about 5 to discover that good old Mom had lost her keys. (Actually, a prior foster dog had chewed a hole in my jacket pocket and the keys fell out.) I ended up calling a taxi, but we waited in the elements for at least an hour total.
We were all properly dressed with boots, hats, gloves and heavy jackets. In spite of being prepared, we were chilled to the bone when we finally got home. I said to my daughter, “I can see how easy it is to freeze to death in the cold, and why people die when they get stuck in the snow.”
I’m sure most people who live in places where it gets dangerously cold have their own stories to tell. That is why it is so tragic and unbelievable that an Idaho father “allowed” his 11 year old daughter and 12 year old son to attempt to walk 10 miles in the snow Christmas day after their vehicle got stuck.
Temperatures ranged from -5 to 27°F when the two set out from the disabled vehicle. According to the Associated Press, the children were living with their father Robert Aragon and were being driven to visit their mother JoLeta Jenks. “After the sedan got caught in the snow, authorities allege Aragon let the children out to walk to their mother’s house while he and his cousin Kenneth Quintana, 29, stayed behind to free the car. (They freed the car and went home rather than driving to make sure the kids made it.) Jenks said she eventually called Aragon because she was concerned after no one arrived at her home on Thursday.
Aragon had driven back to his hometown of Jerome after letting the kids out to walk to her house, Jenks said.
“I could not believe it,” she said.”
The 12 year old boy was found 4 ½ miles away, delusional from hypothermia. His sister was not so lucky, she was found dead 2 ½ miles away. Fleming (the local Sheriff) said she was wearing only a brown down coat, black shirt, pink pajama pants and tan snowboots.
He reportedly commented, “I’ve never seen anything like this, it was a 10-mile walk, the way they were dressed, it’s just all mind-boggling.”
Incidents like this one are the answer to the “So what?” question. What’s the “So what?” question? It is the response judges and attorneys have to the finding that a parent is a sociopath or has psychopathic personality traits. So What?
| DSM IV Sociopathy (Antisocial Personality Disorder) |
| 5. Reckless disregard for safety of self or others. 6. Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations. |
| PCL-R Psychopathy |
| 10. Poor behavioral controls 13. Lack of realistic, long-term goals 15. Irresponsibility 16. Failure to accept responsibility for actions 17. Many short term marital relationships |
The table above shows that irresponsibility and recklessness are part of sociopathy as defined by the psychiatry’s DSM and psychopathy as defined by the PCL-R.
Why are sociopaths so consistently reckless and irresponsible? These traits get us to the core of the disorder. At the core of the disorder is poor impulse control. What that means is that if there is a situation where the sociopath has to balance pleasure and risk, the sociopath will always choose pleasure over managing risk. Sociopaths are unable to feel fear or concern for consequences during the time they are focused on immediate pleasure or comfort.
In situations like the father and the kids in the snow, the pull to get the car out and go home is stronger than any concern for the kids. While in pursuit of a goal involving pleasure, thoughts of risk or danger simply are not there. So why would a sociopath drive to go find the kids when he can go home and be warm?
Also sociopaths are unable to love so they lack working empathy. Thoughts and feelings of another’s physical suffering simply do not register on the radar. Out of sight, out of mind defines sociopaths and their relationships. The minute the kids set out, they are gone.
Sociopaths also lack moral reasoning ability. That means they are unable to detect and interpret situations that have moral implications. The moral implications of parental responsibility do not register at the time life and death decisions have to be made.
There is not much information regarding Aragon’s psychopathic personality traits. But he does have two drug convictions and often drug abuse/addiction causes these personality traits. I am sure we will learn more about this tragic story over the next few months.
Sadly, most people do not understand sociopathy and how it is disabling for a parent. To expect a sociopath to execute sound judgment or be a protective parent when forced to choose between his pleasure and his child’s pain is like expecting a mentally retarded person to do calculus.
One of our Lovefraud readers, Rune sent me these comments to this story as posted on AOL.
Nanamummy
05:41 AMJan 02 2009
If this man is such a criminal…why did he have custody of the children? Yes, he made a decision which will haunt him for life…..what’s to be gained by putting him in jail for life? Over zealous authorities and a useless justice system…..this case really depresses me.
JAKVINOCUR
04:39 AMJan 02 2009
so we are now putting fathers in jail for stuff like this. seriously whether they went walking or not they would have still needed to be in the snow. the father was only doing what he thought was best. if he was such a bad father than why does he have custody of them over the mother. yes it was a bad judgement on his part but dont you think he has been punished enough by losing his daughter. we will punish people for [heinous] crimes but we still cannot find osama bin laden or even catch murderers here or sex offenders. wheter what he did or not is irrelvent he lost his daughter let him go find peace in his heart. if god can forgive him why cant we. stupid to let this man go to prison.
Keshet333
11:55 PMJan 02 2009
This is a very unfortunate accident. The fact that the man had custody of the children tells me that he was a good father. In situations such as these, decision making is sometimes not the best. This man will be haunted by this for the rest of his life. They should drop all charges. Isn’t he paying enough for his bad judgment?
Russiawthluv
06:08 PMJan 01 2009
Obviously the man did NOT mean to harm his children. His son and daughter lived with him. He took care of their basic, daily needs. Why would he intentionally bring harm to either child when he has taken care of them so well for their entire lives? There’s no doubt in my mind he made an extremely poor decision. Then again, these two kids were more than likely used to snow, rain and other extreme weather, being that they grew up in that climate. The way he is portrayed by the media is simply unacceptable! Especially with the eye-catching headline..”MAN ALLOWS HIS CHILDREN TO WALK 10 MLES IN DEEP SNOW. 11 YEAR DAUGHTER DEAD FROM HYPOTHERMIA.” For the most part, even if this man wanted a fair trial….how’s he ever going to get one if slanderous & severely misconstrued statements were already pumped out to the masses? That man is in bitter anguish. It’s a “life sentence” if you ask me for this individual to have to spend the remainder of his life knowing his poor decision resulted in the…
The comments also indicate that people don’t know that sociopaths frequently get custody of children. One cannot assume that the parent who has custody is “providing for them.”
It is time for family courts to learn to assess sociopathy and its meaning for parenting. The very least they could do in the case of two sociopathic parents is to educate them about their defects. At least we should tell them, “Look, you are missing all of your decision making social brain, so don’t put yourself in a situation where you will have to choose between your child’s welfare and your own comfort!”
FYI AOL has a poll, I participated and got the following results:
Poll Results
Do you think a murder charge is warranted in this case?
No 47% 101,555
Yes 31% 66,279
I’m not sure 22% 46,384
Hey Trla – BOTH. We treat them as both ill and criminal. They would love it (pity play manipulation) if we treated them as poor, sick, souls, after they got cornered, finally, and had to face the music. And they are sick, absolutely. But they need very firm consequences, and those that would specifically help to prevent them from committing the same, or similar crimes. That may have to be locking them up and throwing away the key.
I am encouraged that research is making new discoveries about their brain functioning – hopefully someday, perhaps even in the next decade or two, they will find a way to treat or reprogram these guys. I know its not that simple, but that would be a great start.
Trla,
“It’s obvious there are sociopathic ingredients to this tragic happening.
My core question would be, “Do we treat them as criminals, or do we treat them as “ill—?”
My vote is that we treat them as criminals. Their personality types are the reason the pillory, stocks and public hangings were invented. Our personality types are the reason they were done away with. We were WRONG!!! The cluster Bs need punishment to be public and cruel. It’s the only hope of curbing their behavior, due to their lack of internal controls. It is a kindness to these people to be extremely clear about the consequences of bad behavior. They need the threat of serious punishment in order to accept limits. Cluster Bs can live reasonably well if they know someone is always standing by, ready to kick their backsides up between their ears if they misbehave. They’re rudderless without the threat of punishment.
Elizabeth,
My dear I agree AND disagree with your statement “they’re fudderless without the threat of punishment.”
A FEW of them will respond to punishment constraints, but the psychopaths tend to not even be afraid of anything. Even jail or the death penalty.
I have worked with these cluster Bs in both inpatient and outpatient settings.My son C’s step daughter was histrionic if ever there was one. EVen in an inpatient setting where you have essentially “total” control over these people with instant sanctions for unacceptable behavior, they are canny in seeking ways around your “rules.” In the “free world” where the punishments are not so “sure” and “swift” the threat is not enough to contain them from most “bad” behavior I think.
I vote for treating them as criminals too, although I have wondered if prison is the right answer in one or two prominent cases in which expert witnesses diagnosed severe mental illness. But for most of them…… I think criminal penalties are in order.
When talking about personalities, I have wondered where the Myers-Briggs typology fits into all this or if it does. Are certain personality types more inclined to become N/S/P, and are certain personality types more inclined to become their victims.
Are sensitive introverts better targets for and N/S/Ps than assertive extroverts?
Does ones personality type tend to support a mind-set that might be more inclined to explain away the red flags , or not really grasp what they mean.
I read an article this morning that someone from the SEC clearly warned about Madoff ten years ago and the red flags have been flapping in the wind since then only to be ignored by the world’s most sophisticated financial wizards.
Then I read another article about investors taking responsibility for their losses and for not exercising due diligence! So the blame/shame game once again confuses the issue and weighs heavily on those who were duped and suffered heavy financial losses.
It’s interesting to note the comments here.
My first thought, as a non-lawyer, was “criminal negligence” at the very least.
Then again, perhaps the father was trying to adhere to a time-specific parenting plan arrangement. For example, ours is 9am-6pm for holidays such as Christmas, parent birthdays, etc.).
Too bad for both parents that:
1. the father even went out in the weather at that time. [It’s my feeling he could have called the mom and rescheduled due to the treacherous driving conditions and snow drifts, or cancelled altogether, and traded a different holiday in the future.]
2. the mother would’ve insisted upon getting her visitation [per the parenting plan – which, these days, is like “Moses and the tablets carved in stone,” as far as the COURTS are concerned], even when the consequences were so potentially tragic.
And what about not using the cell phones?
And what about the kids being instructed by the father to “walk on”?
And what about the father and friend getting the car UNstuck and then NOT checking the rest of the entire route that the kids took?
And what about the father NOT calling local law enforcement and explaning the situation AFTER he got the car unstuck and got home (or where EVER) he went?
This situation is so fraught with stupidity – as I see it, the charge of second degree murder is merely the prosecutions’ “opening gambit” and it leaves room for “plea bargaining” down to a charge of criminal negligence – at which time the father will think he’s pretty damn LUCKY…even if it means a minimum sentence OR probation.
It just goes to prove my longstanding maxim: “STUPID PEOPLE SHOULDN’T BREED!”
I would vote for treating them as criminals. They hide behind their ego, & it seems all important for them to be always seen as the good guy. They are no different than sexual offenders, they should have to register as a spath where ever they live, just like SO’s do. I try not to sound too bitter, or dwell on what was done to us, yet sometimes I can’t even imagine a punishment severe enough that fits their crimes. I ‘m sure we have have run scenarioes in our heads about what we’d like to see done to them. It would be like hitting a boulder with a ball bat, waiting for the boulder to say, “ouch, that hurts”. I know their brains are wired up (f**ked up) differently than normal people, that doesn’t excuse the hurt they inflict. Even primal animals don’t hurt just for the sake of hurting. They need to eat, or they are acting in self preservation mode.
sstiles54
That is how they survive . Prime evil ! I wAs thinking about a movie
Where The psyc student was experimenting with regression back to primal instinc of basic survival Remember the Tank Aquatic suspencion 100pts for the name of this movie Hahaaha
I wonder sometimes if my ex S could help himself in his behaviors. I am not excusing him, and never going back to him…but the things he did really hurt HIM, perhaps even the most in the end. If not themost, they really did hurt him. I had my heart and soul tromped all over – but I get to walk away from the trainwreck and heal. He has to live the trainwreck. He really did hurt himself in what he did to me – and openly admits that. I think he can’t help himself. I don’t know if any consequences would work – except death. Or maybe as someone else said “public and severe.” I still don’t think it would work. My ex S made the same mistake over and over and over with different women – actually lost a lot of money in the process, and a lot of good women. There are plenty of other good women out there – no doubt, and he will find them.
Their brains really aren’t different and dysfunctional. If we could find a way to identify them and treat them, early on, we might spare the world an enormous amount of pain. I think we need to focus on warning the public about them (though I suspect they will never believe us until they get burned), and focus on fixing these guys. Cuz they certainly aren’t going to stop reproducing. In fact, considering their promiscuity and cavalier attitude toward impregnating multiple women – they are likely increasing in droves
ARGH! I meant their brains ARE different and dysfunctional.
Maybe that was a freudian slip, or a message from the universe
Punishment? Elizabeth, Tria, Ox-D, you might look at the December 2007 Scientific American Mind.
In the article, the authors quote from anthropologist Jane M. Murphy’s 1976 study of an isolated group of Yupik-speaking Inuits who lived near the Bering Strait. They had a word (kunlangeta) for “a man who . . . repeatedly lies and cheats and steals things and . . . takes sexual advantage of many women–someone who does not pay attention to reprimands and who is always being brought to the elders for punishment.” The article continues to note that when Murphy asked what the group would do with such a person, an Inuit answered, “Somebody would have pushed him off the ice when nobody else was looking.”
This is not new. And it is not specific to our society.