(The following article is copyrighted © 2012 by Steve Becker, LCSW. My use of male gender pronouns is strictly for convenience’s sake and not to suggest that females aren’t capable of the attitudes and behaviors discussed.)
Let’s be honest. The term “sociopath” has become so commonplace, a very good thing (reflecting the increasingly spacious public awareness of exploiters), that it sometimes seems that pretty much every jerk we confront we’re tempted to call a “sociopath.”
Now, there’s way more “upside” to this than “downside.” And I’d say this applies to terms like “abusive” as well. And thank goodness the concept of “abuse” is now much more widely understood—it’s wider public reach, along with the lay public’s greater access to issues like “narcissism” and the various diagnoses associated with it (like sociopathy), are wonderful and important developments.
At the same time, a small consequence of this is that these “labels” can be thrown around with some recklessness and, frankly, often are. Not every act of deception, manipulation, not every outburst of anger, not every act of insensitivity, is perpetrated by a sociopath, malignant narcissist or abuser.
All of us, at least most of us, are capable of highly insensitive and destructive behaviors, or behaviors perceived as such by others. This doesn’t diminish their seriousness or their destructiveness; after all, non-sociopaths can murder while a great many sociopaths won’t, and maybe even can’t.
Many non-sociopaths are guilty of acts of harm that don’t make them sociopaths—acts that many sociopaths themselves, at the end of the day, will be able to say, “Well, hell, I didn’t do that!”
And so we want to be perhaps somewhat disciplined around the liberality with which we’re tempted, whenever outraged by another’s selfishness or insensivity, to hurl the epithet, “You sociopath!”
Sure, we’re all happily addicted to the Investigation Discovery channel, which leaves us, naturally, with the conviction that 47% of the population must be hard-core sociopathic. (No, Mitt Romney didn’t allege that percentage.). Watch the ID channel every night and you can jack that number up to 68%.
I mean I heard a customer leave a Rite Aid the other day, annoyed about failing, apparently, to get a refund on a product, and scream at the manager, “You sociopath!” Now her anger may have been very justified, but the diagnosis seemed a bit rash and, based on the evidence, a bit thin.
Nor would it have surprised me to hear the manager scream back defensively, “Who’s the sociopath, lady!?” He didn’t, in a demonstration of great diagnostic self-discipline.
As the lady walked past me, she muttered, “What the hell are you looking at?”
Well, I was looking at her. Was there some law against that? I half expected her to stop in her tracks and lay me out right there.
But I think we need to remember this about sociopaths—they demonstrate a very longstanding pattern of deeply disturbing behaviors, characterized by gross, shocking, outrageous transgressions against others, with pathological indifference to the suffering and trauma their behaviors cause others.
When you are dealing with an individual with this history, with this track record, you are dealing with a seriously disturbed individual who absolutely deserves to be diagnosed with a “warning label” such as “warning: sociopath,” or “warning: abuser,” or “warning: malignant narcissist,” or something of the sort.
For the rest of us, inexcusable, selfish and hurtful behaviors should never be condoned, whether we are their perpetrators or victims. We can’t excuse destructive behaviors. We must confront them, and if we are on the receiving end, we need to put ourselves in positions of safety as soon as possible.
Meanwhile, the next time someone cuts you off on the road, even recklessly, although Robert Hare, Ph.D., might call him a “psychopath,” we need to remember it’s possible, too, that he’s just a lousy driver, in a rush from his own foolish making, or maybe just a good-old fashioned jerk. But he may not be a sociopath, and probably isn’t.
Even though it’s so sorely tempting to flip him the finger as you shout, “You ”¦.ing sociopath!”
A little knowledge is such a dangerous thing.
It saddens me when people uses terms inappropriately because when they are used appropriately, they can be very powerful and descriptive.
About the only thing that I can see changing the status quo is education and more education.
Sure we can speak up on a one-by-one basis, but we’re very limited to who would be approachable with our message to begin with.
Still, it’s better that people are aware of something. Maybe it’s progressive. We keep planting seeds and hoping that something takes.
At least people now are starting to understand that everybody is not born good.
I don’t think the general public begins to have a clue about the prevalence of psychopaths or how dangerous, cunning, and deceptive they are.
We have so far still to go, but I do think we’re out of the gate!
Steve your point is extremely valid….the term has come to have no consistent meaning. Experts can’t agree on a NAME for the disorder, and the public thinks it is the same as “jerk” or “serial killer” and/or anywhere in between.
People who are extremely abusive, however, NEED a “label” of some sort that MEANS SOMETHING CONSISTENTLY who as you say
“But I think we need to remember this about sociopaths—they demonstrate a very longstanding pattern of deeply disturbing behaviors, characterized by gross, shocking, outrageous transgressions against others, with pathological indifference to the suffering and trauma their behaviors cause others.”
Not all socio/psycho-paths however are Charlie Manson, OJ, Sandusky, or some other “serial” killer or rapist, there are the Bernie Maddoff’s, and frankly I think he qualifies, though he had good manners and was “suavie and de-boner” —he had “a very longstanding pattern of deeply disturbing behaviors characterized by gross, shocking, outrageous transgressions against others with pathological indifference to the suffering and trauma” his behaviors caused others.
I wish the professionals would get their act together and get a NAME for this disorder decided on and come to agreement about the necessary diagnostic criteria…(can you tell I am frustrated?) LOL
Good article Steve,
I have felt this is what happened with the Parent Alienation Syndrome and I am concerned about how much I am hearing the Borderline Personality Disorder and Histrionic Personality Disorder being overused in court cases. It’s unfortunate these can’t all be proven with a blood test or something easy with the rest being labeled “troubled” and in need of some help……
Steve,
Perhaps the lady in the rite aid was projecting? It’s possible.
You said, “But I think we need to remember this about sociopaths—they demonstrate a very longstanding pattern of deeply disturbing behaviors, characterized by gross, shocking, outrageous transgressions against others, with pathological indifference to the suffering and trauma their behaviors cause others.”
It’s a very good definition and certainly true. But, if we need to wait until we see this long standing pattern, that leaves us unable to use the red flags for those times when we need an instant diagnosis before we get involved.
My experience has been that I can use the red flags to go on alert. Later, as I learn more about a person and his/her previous relationshits, it confirms what the red flags already showed.
The truth is though, I’m not sure I know the difference between a spath and a jerk. I’ve known spaths who will say, “I’m a jerk” and it’s true. So sometimes spaths will hide behind the “jerk” label. We need to be careful of that.
Another question: Do normal people sometimes go off the edge and start behaving maliciously toward others for no apparent reason? If you see someone do that, who has never done so before, can we say that they are not spaths because this is the first time you’ve known them to do that?
I’d rather err on the side of caution and just call them a spath.
One small point: since neither psychopathy nor sociopathy are currently accepted diagnoses in the DSM, it’s not possible – technically – for anyone to ‘diagnose’ someone as a sociopath or psychopath. However, it is possible for someone to accuse someone else of being so, which I think is the main caution in Steve’s argument, that that term is lobbed at people as a weapon, rather than being properly applied in an informed and educated – and situationally appropriate – way.
Of course, Oxy’s point that even the experts can’t figure out what to call whom with any consistency doesn’t help make things any clearer.
I agree with both Skylar and Oxy here – for our purposes the label is pretty much irrelevant – what’s important is to notice the red flag and step back to safety, until one can better determine that persons character over the long term. A single red flag does not a sociopath make, but it should make a ‘sit back and observe their behaviour’ stance more requisite on the part of the observer. I think most of the advice here on LF is, if you see enough red flags in the right combination, don’t wait around long enough to figure out the ‘diagnosis’ unless you have to – treat them all with the same caution.
Annie,
yes, that is exactly what I believe. We do have the power to discern a disordered person. The signs are all over the place and so are the spaths.
As an example, I’ve told this story before but it bears repeating.
I met an 80 year old lady who cried on my shoulder, “WHY did my parents abandon me? They left me with 12 different families in my first 18 years.” She had told me a little about them and for some reason I said, “Your mom was protecting you from your dad. I think he was a pedophile.”
Her response, “Oh NO! My father wasn’t like that! He was an admiral in the navy.”
Later I met her daughter and her granddaughter (and various other members). The whole family has narcissistic PD’s coming out their ears. I told the daughter about my exchange with her mom. She said, “oh no! grand daddy wasn’t like that. Although he did fondle me once. I never talked to him again.”
It isn’t hard to see when you know what to look for. Even 60 years later, the signs of the spath linger. You can see them through space and time, in the slime they leave behind. Hey, that rhymed!
😀
I did not know sociopathy and psychopathy weren’t in the DSM. Is BPD or Anti-Social in it?
“…even 60 years later, the signs of the spath linger.
You can see them through space and time,
in the slime they leave behind.”
ahahahahaha
That was great!
LOVE IT!!!!!
Just need a tune to go with it…
We’ll YOU TUBE it. lol
Eralyn,
What Hare and others refer to as “psychopathy” is in the DSM IV which is the diagnostic manual for psychologists and psychiatrists…first off let me say though the DSM is on the net and available, the DSM is not intended for the lay person, it is intended for the professional.
Many “common” words used in psychology are not used the same way in normal speech. For example, if I told you someone was “anti social” you would probably think they didn’t like parties, or they were a hermit, or just didn’t like to socialize.
The words “anti social” are used in describing what Lay people think of more or less as a “psychopath” or “sociopath” and it is
ANTI-SOCIAL Personality disorder.
There is disagreement in the professional community about what the name of the disorder should be and also what the exact criteria are.
Dr. Robert Hare developed the “Psychopath check list-Revised” which is used by many courts as the “gold standard” in determining if a criminal is a “psychopath or not” It is also used in research.
The form on which diagnoses in psychology are used is divided into sections and the part labeled AXIS II contains the “personality disorders” (the symptoms of which over lap quite a bit with each other.) What is called “cluster B” is where you find ASPD and BPD etc. So if you hear someone referred to as a “cluster B” PD that is what they are talking about.
There are those who think the term “sociopath” means a person became that because of how they were raised and a psychopath is born that way. There is no research I know of that supports such a distinction.
I prefer the term psychopath because that is what I am used to and what Hare uses. Donna Andersen uses “sociopath” because she thinks it has less bad press among the media and general public and she may be right. (I hope I explained your stance correctly Donna, if not, please correct me)
Actually I don’t CARE if the professionals will “label” the condition DOODLY SQUAT as long as they agree on some name and quit CHANGING it every time a new book (DSM revision) comes out. I do think the term “ASPD” is not understood at all by the general public and it sounds like someone is a hermit, not a psychopath so I would prefer some other name than the one they have now.
Okay here is a link to an article from psycohlogy today that explains things pretty well
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-shrink-tank/201002/dsm-v-offers-new-criteria-personality-disorders