Reading the newspaper on Saturday, two terrible articles jumped off the page.
A New Jersey man accused of abandoning his infant daughter at a gas station in Delaware has been charged with killing the toddler’s mother, whose burning body was found in an upstate New York park. Read more.
A man apparently infatuated with a special-education teacher shot and killed her as she walked into her elementary school Friday, shortly before students began arriving. Read more.
These were stories of domestic violence with the worst possible endings.
Dr. Liane Leedom has written previously on Lovefraud that, “studies of male perpetrators of domestic violence reveal that 50% are sociopaths and another 25% have sociopathic traits, but not the full disorder.”
So how big is the problem of domestic violence?
Not long ago, a Lovefraud reader sent me a link to a web page hosted by the American Bar Association Commission on Domestic Violence. The page is a survey of recent statistics, compiled to help lawyers and advocates who want to include statistical data in arguments to the court.
The list is truly sobering. Here are some highlights:
• Approximately 1.3 million women and 835,000 men are physically assaulted by an intimate partner annually in the United States.
• In recent years, an intimate partner killed approximately 33% of female murder victims and 4% of male murder victims.
• Of females killed with a firearm, almost two-thirds were killed by their intimate partners.
• 1,006,970 women and 370,990 men are stalked annually in the United States.
• 81% of women stalked by a current or former intimate partner are also physically assaulted by that partner.
• 61% of stalkers made unwanted phone calls; 33% sent or left unwanted letters or items; 29% vandalized property; and 9% killed or threatened to kill a family pet.
• In 8 out of 10 rape cases, the victim knows the perpetrator
• 13% of adult women had been victims of completed rape during their lifetime
• In a study of eighth and ninth graders, 25 percent indicated that they had been victims of dating violence, including eight percent who disclosed being sexually abused.
• Physical aggression occurs in 1 in 3 teen dating relationships.
• About 50 percent of battered women who are employed are harassed at work by their abusive partners.
• Slightly more than half of female victims of intimate violence live in households with children under age 12.
• Between 3.3 million and 10 million children witness domestic violence annually.
• A study of 2,245 children and teenagers found that recent exposure to violence in the home was a significant factor in predicting a child’s violent behavior.
Those are just a few of the listings. There are many more on the ABA page, and several have links to the actual studies and other informative websites. Read more.
Here’s the bottom line: Of the assaults committed by men, 50% are being committed by sociopaths, and another 25% are being committed by men with sociopathic traits. I’d be willing to bet that the women who commit domestic violence are also sociopathic.
I think we can assume that most of the intimate partners were romantic and lovey-dovey when they first met the targets, and the relationship gradually spiraled down into abuse. This is why we need to know about sociopaths—so if we start seeing the first signs of violence, we can get out before things get out of hand.
Dear Donna, thanks for these statistics and links. It is SOBERING, or ought to be, for us all. DV of one degree or another is so “common” it seems, and if 50% of the perps of DV are “Sociopaths” and another 25% of them have “sociopathic traits”, to me that equals a BUNCH of guys that ought to be on a “don’t-date-him-girl” list somewhere.
Sometimes just reading a list like this makes me want to move to a desert island somewhere, but that’s hiding our heads in the sand, and our energies would be better directed to preventing this, and I noticed on the local news last night that there speakers on DATING violence for TEENAGERS in schools going on now and I thought that was a very good step in the right direction. Get it to the TEENS who are starting to date before you have to take it to the young mothers who have 2 kids and no way to make a living if they throw the bum out. PREVENTION is always the better option, and starting with the younger kids is a good idea. I am glad to see it getting started in the schools.
I noticed that in one of the public middle schools that my son and I do history presentations for, there are NO BULLYING signs all over the place and they are enforced as well as they possibly can be. A great school BTW!
Thanks Donna, scary information, but things we ought to be aware of.
50% of the perps of DV are sociopaths, and another 25% have sociopathic traits…
Can anyone expand on what the difference is of a true S, vs. one that has the “traits” but not full blown sociopathy? Does this mean that this person does exhibit some to the criteria but not enough to be “diagnosed” as a sociopath?
I have heard that addicts can mimic sociopathy, would this be under the 25% as well, according to the study?
Just slightly confused (sometimes it dosen’t take much):)
I thought with sociopaths- ya either is- or ya ain’t….
Donna:
Thank you for posting this information!
What a service you did for numerous readers who are wondering about the relationship between DV and Sociopaths.
This is the info we should be getting out to the teens…..
I know what the talk around the dinner table will be at my house tonight!!!
Sabrina,
Antisocial personality disorder is a continuum. That means it includes various traits, and individuals can have the traits to varying degrees. Some sociopaths are certainly worse than others. I say that they range from sleazy to serial killer.
The best tool for diagnosing this disorder is the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), by Dr. Robert Hare. Dr. Hare uses the term “psychopath” – he defines sociopathy as something different.
The PCL-R is an evaluation with 20 items on it. A clinician an individual a score of 0, 1 or 2 for each item. Zero means the individual doesn’t exhibit the characteristic, 2 means he or she definitely has the characteristic.
Scores, therefore, range for 0 to 40. According to Dr. Hare, someone with a score of 30 or above meets the definition of a psychopath. But even if someone has a score of 20, you don’t want to get involved with him or her. They are nasty people, just not as nasty as those with higher scores.
So that is what Dr. Leedom means, although the research she quotes probably relates to the DSM-IV criteria for sociopaths, which is different from PCL-R.
So the point at which someone “is” or “is not” a sociopath is a matter of debate. For us, the take-home lesson is that some are worse than others, but we don’t want to be involved with any of them.
AMEN!!!! DONNA!!!!! Can everyone stand up and raise you hands and give Donna a big “YES MAM!!!!!!”
WE DO NOT WANT TO BE INVOLVED WITH ANY OF THEM!!!!!
That one sentence is all we need to focus on, we do NOT want to be involved with anyone who scores on a PCL-R or has any of the NASTY TRAITS…..
AMEN, HERE HERE, MOTION SECONDED……
COURT ADJORNED!
Hear hear, EB, we need them like a dose of the clap!
Love, Gem.XX
Where I get confused…..and I TOTALLY agree that we just need to stay away from ALL who even begin to show any signs……is that it seems that some of these psychopaths are as much an extension of the narcissistic personality disorder or the borderline disorder, etc. as of the antisocial personality disorder.
I like Dr. Leedom’s thinking (and I hope I don’t misrepresent it) that there are these toxic personality disorders (cluster B?) such as antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, narcissitic personality disorder, etc. ….but pathology is a continuum upon which we all fall….Mother Theresa at one end, Ted Bundy and others at the other end….regardless of what other diagnosis may apply.
But I may have it wrong. But that thinking really makes sense to me. I think seeing pathology as only antisocial personality disorder on steroids is going to miss some of the “white collar” psychopaths….like a Thomas Crown (fictional character from the movie). Or perhaps a Tiger Woods, dare I say it. No crimes, but plenty of exploitation, lies, pulling one over, betrayal (including cheating on those he was cheating with), etc. But maybe the antisocial diagnosis captures him, don’t know.
Regardless of how I personally like to frame it in my own head, I think Donna has represented where the current thinking is or is headed for the mental health field.
Dear Never again,
There are several behaviors that are part of the make up of the “personality disordered” group of people. With let us say in this post that PD is the over all “name”
There is Narcissism in all of them to one degree or another,
There is manipulation in all of them to one degree or another
also Callousness, aggression, hostility, ceceitfrulness, irresponsibility, recklessness, and impulsivity.
I think of this like say a painter mixing “colors” from a group of “primary colors”—so othe shades of one psychopathic portrait may not be exactly the same as the others, but they ALL contain a good mix of the PRIMARY COLORS.
Even a normal person at times is somewhat aggressive, or callouus, or even manipulative, or feels hostil, or is deceitful,
or a bit narcisxsixstic, or has been irresponsible, reckless or impulsive at one point or another. However, Back to your Mother Theresa on one end and Ted Bundy on the other end, mother Theresa’s portrait would be a VERY pale color compared to TED BUNDY’s which would be filled almost entirely with primary colors.
Depenbding on the social skills of some of the Ps, like Ted
Bundy was pretty socially skilled compared to say Charlie Manson and the “average Joe” would pick up on Manson probably quicker than they would on Bundy, but becausethere are such a large number of behavioral “primary colors” that can be observed, the variability of the “portraits” painted with these hews can be considerable.
The Tiger Woods portrait, I think would contain a great deal of Narcissism, and a great deal of deceitfulness, recklessness, impulsivity, manipulativeness and callsousness, I’m not sure about the aggression, but just the reports of his sexual exploits makes me think he scores well in all the other primary colors. I didn’t see any real signs of remorse or repentence in his “confession” of his “sex addictikon” (I thought he was trying to make him self appear HELPLESS TO HAVE CONTROLED THIS “ADDICTION.”–PUKE!)
OJ on the other hand, I think scores a HIGH NUMBER in all the “primary colors” and is quite AGGRESSIVE, even before he (I think killed Nichole) he beat her, so the killing was just upping the antee in the game and I think probably was pretty impulsive. It was recklessness as well, but I think was pre-planned. Just my opinion. He did not change though, and what got him arrested and jailed this time was that he thinks in PRIMARY COLORS OF THE PSYCHOPATH,, “I am entitled” “I am the best” “I deserve” and “I will use force”
I’m hopint the new DSM V way of ratiing the density of the “primary colors” of the psychopaths to “paint their portraits” with a psychological brush so that they are understandable to courts, to the public and to the law, will
help in making some sense of this mish-mash of terms.
Thanks Oxy.
Here’s my little rule. If a man is so bad that you get diarrhea when you think about him for more than two minutes….he is definitely a psychopath. 🙂