The man who killed six people and injured many others at a Bondi shopping mall on Saturday, 40-year-old Joel Cauchi, apparently he had “mental health problems,” the police explained shortly after the tragic event, but ruled out terrorism.
Cauchi was reportedly diagnosed with a mental illness on the age of 17 and received treatment in the private and non-private sectors. But Queensland police said Cauchi’s mental condition has deteriorated lately.
Regardless of the circumstances, such acts of violence should be condemned. If mental health issues contribute to such acts, they should be understood and prevented.
However, it ought to be remembered that the overwhelming majority of mentally ailing people do not pose a risk of violence against others.
Unfortunately, there continues to be an unacceptable level of stigma and misunderstanding of mental illness, including the misunderstanding that people with mental illness are violent. People can learn lessons from cases just like the Bondi attack, where people with mental illness commit violence.
So is there a connection between mental illness and violent crime? Here’s what the evidence says.
For most people with mental illness, there isn’t a increase in violence
Tests from Australia and abroad to introduce a small percentage of people with serious mental illness could also be at increased risk of violence.
Our research in Victoria, for instance, to introduce 10% of people with schizophrenia (a serious type of mental illness wherein the patient’s condition could also be so bad that he loses contact with reality) have committed a violent crime. For comparison, this figure is roughly 2.4% of the overall population. So while people with schizophrenia were at higher risk of committing a violent crime, the overwhelming majority were not.
The arrangements are in place mixed regarding the direct link between more common mental illnesses, akin to anxiety and depression, and violence.
Although the the explanation why anyone – including people with mental illness – commit crimes vary, we discover three categories of mentally ailing people who engage in violence.
1. Irrational pondering and beliefs
The first is a really small group of people with a serious mental illness, normally schizophrenia, who behave aggressively as a direct results of the symptoms of their mental illness.
For these people, the disease results in irrational pondering and beliefs which will make them more prone to behave aggressively. An individual may develop delusional beliefs that they are being targeted or that their life is at risk in the event that they do not use violence against perceived enemies.
For these people, in the event that they did not have specific symptoms of mental illness, they would not be offended.
People on this category could also be found not guilty by reason of mental retardation. They are then normally held in secure hospitals or prisons where they continue to be treated and eventually releasedonce they are not deemed to pose a risk to others.
2. Overlapping social aspects
The second category is way broader and more diverse. For this group, people do not offend due to mental illness per se, but due to the related individual and social problems that may accompany mental illness.
People affected by some types of mental illness, for instance, could also be more prone to abuse substances, which in turn may contribute to crime.
Many negative social aspects are associated with serious types of mental illness overlap with negative social aspects that increase the likelihood of violence.
People with serious types of mental illness whose environments are characterised by social and family disruptions and drawbacks, including violence, behavioral disorders, substance use and academic failure and disengagement, are far more likely offend than mentally ailing people who do not have such disorders within the background.
Of course, most people suffer from psychotic illnesses they do not come such disadvantaged environments.
Research and clinical experience also show Factors associated with crime on this group are just like those amongst people without mental illness. In addition to substance abuse, this will include aggressive attitudes, exposure to trauma and violence, association with antisocial people, and poor family and work support.
3. Mental illness is not related
The last group of mentally ailing people to commit crimes achieve this no matter mental illness. People on this group are normally characterised by early antisocial and illegal behavior.
They differ from other criminals with mental illness in that they’ve a pervasive and stable pattern of offending, no matter their mental condition. This behavior almost at all times precedes the onset of mental illness.
While people with psychopathic or antisocial personality disorder are included on this group, not all people on this group could have this personality disorder.
Mental health care can reduce the chance of violence
It is not mental illness itself that makes people violent. Rather, they are symptoms of diseases and aspects associated with them.
Is good evidence due to this fact, providing psychiatric and psychological care will help manage the symptoms of mental illness reduce likelihood of violence.
It can be necessary address broader aspects that are associated with crime and violence amongst mentally ailing people.
Unfortunately, partly consequently of the pressure on mental health services, staff have few resources to assist address the range of things that may result in aggressive behavior. Continued investment and education are needed to enhance services and address the aspects that result in violence amongst people with mental illness.
While we have now made some progress in recognizing that mental illness affects a big percentage of the population, individual acts of violence committed by a mentally ailing person should not lead us to the hasty conclusion that each one people with mental illness are violent.
