An interesting topic was taught today at my Psychology class, where we learned in-depth REM and non-REM sleep disorders and how they affect how we act, consciously or unconsciously. Two terms surfaced, which were "Sleep Walking" and "Night Terrors". Actually three. It's called "REM behavior disorder", where the mechanism to paralyze your body during REM mode fails, allowing you to thrash about during your sleep and 'act out your dreams and nightmares'.
Let's refresh our terms just so we are clear on what these mean, shall we?
Sleep Walking: The process in which during sleep, sleeper has chronic episodes of moving or walking.
Night Terrors: Not to be associated with 'nightmares', sleeper experiences extreme fear, in which he/she screams and runs around without waking from the dream.
During REM sleep (rapid eye movement), your brain is nearly as active as it is when you're awake, which may explain the vividness and realities of dreams. With any of these terms, the sleeper can be active as usual, except they aren't 'experiencing' real-life scenarios--they are still sleeping! They are able to do many things that they may not normally do, such as eat raw bacon or other unsanitary meals, walk to the neighbors' porches to be mischievous, or do more serious offenses, such as larceny and murder.
Can these experiences and disorders justify said crimes? It goes without saying that dreams and states of consciousness are one of the fastest-growing topics of today and are otherwise very unknown to us. With proper claims, sources, and evidence, can a person convicted for a crime be set free, because they really didn't 'do it', regardless of what crime it is?
Let me be very clear that it really shouldn't matter what the crime was.
Can these experiences and disorders justify said crimes?
Atleast to some degree they can. If something happens out of the blue it would be not their fault. But if say they were fighting with someone a lot and the next night they attack that person while they are sleeping(the attacker is asleep I mean), well then it shouldn't be justified by the fact that they were asleep.
With proper claims, sources, and evidence, can a person convicted for a crime be set free, because they really didn't 'do it', regardless of what crime it is?
If proven beyond doubt, but then I get the feeling this would be very difficult to prove beyond doubt.
The US Marines have a rule that you are not accountable for the first 10 seconds you are awake, because we can be so delirious from the sleep that we have no idea where we are. People can do things in their sleep without their own knowledge.
A man in Britain was found innocent for sexual assault when it was proven that he has a rare condition where he gets "frisky" in his sleep. A girl at a party passed out next to him and he began feeling her up and getting "hot and heavy" with her. But psychological tests showed that he was capable of doing it in his sleep.
Now, if he invited the girl into bed and did not warn her, he would be partly responsible. But he was already passed out drunk and had no chance to warn the girl. So I don't see how he could be responsible.
If proven beyond doubt, but then I get the feeling this would be very difficult to prove beyond doubt.
I agree with that. I can't imagine how to undoubtedly prove it with our actual knowledge and possibilities; but if it is proven it can justify crimes, since you didn't do it with the intention of doing it, and since, at least as far as I know, we are only able of restricted influence on our dreams while sleeping, but we don't choose them.
If a person has a history of said sleep disorders very much prior to the date of the crime, then it's plausible that they would be able to declare him or her innocent. If others can attest to the history of sleep disorders, then all the better. Now if the person just happened to have the sleep disorder days before the incident, learned about how you can be declared innocent by having sleep disorders, and just happened to have a neighbor you didn't like, you would have a lot of suspicious eyes on this end of the courtroom.
I believe they can. The subconscious mind is something we have yet to even partially understand, who knows what's down there. Also in a court of law one must raise doubt, a sleep disorder is sure to do this. I have a question to add seeing as I suffer from a very different sleep disorder. Can, in severe cases, a person who suffers from isomnia (like me) be held responsible for their actions?
Can, in severe cases, a person who suffers from isomnia (like me) be held responsible for their actions?
Insomnia means "lack of sleep; state of not being able to sleep; state of not accumulating enough sleep." This just means that people need to, well, sleep!
What we're discussing here is where people are dreaming, but are also interacting with real life societies, which can prove harmful and fatal, for both the sleeper and those around him. I don't want to interact with a night terror sleeper, that's for sure.
If you have a history of sleep disorders and there aren't any motives for committing the crime as well as no history of crime in the past I feel like blaming it on the disorder isn't a stretch.
As a side note one of my substitute teachers has narcolepsy. It makes class a lot easier.
I believe psychological disorders and the like should not be punished per se, being that the person who committed that crime had no control over it. However, we must also take into account that even though the person had no control over what they did, if they are dangerous, then perhaps it is time to look into helping them. Court-mandated psychiatric sessions for sure, and perhaps they should be put on a parole or something. For the people who are dangerous and cannot be helped...to be honest, I do not know. It is a very difficult subject and is hard to approach. The question really is... Should we let someone who has no control over what they do go free, thus potentially putting others at risk, or... Should we remove those people from society even though the thing causing them to commit these crimes is out of their control?
I believe psychological disorders and the like should not be punished per se, being that the person who committed that crime had no control over it. However, we must also take into account that even though the person had no control over what they did, if they are dangerous, then perhaps it is time to look into helping them. Court-mandated psychiatric sessions for sure, and perhaps they should be put on a parole or something. For the people who are dangerous and cannot be helped...to be honest, I do not know. It is a very difficult subject and is hard to approach. The question really is... Should we let someone who has no control over what they do go free, thus potentially putting others at risk, or... Should we remove those people from society even though the thing causing them to commit these crimes is out of their control?
Good points Hyper. If said person is dangerous only when he has these episodes of sleepwalking and night terrors, then with proper medication, these episodes can be sustained. There should be no reason to lock them up, however. Maybe house containment would be best. The sleeper has the freedom to move about and enjoy the life of his/her home, as well as not face punishments for what he or she couldn't control.
If said person is dangerous only when he has these episodes of sleepwalking and night terrors, then with proper medication, these episodes can be sustained.
You mean contained? Sustaining something is to keep it going...err...nvm. Anyway, yes, this is true, however I think we can expand this topic. What about people with mental disorders causing them to be a danger to people when they are awake? There are of course, mental disorders for which we have no substantial cure, and it is people with those disorders that I am primarily interested in. Also; I feel house containment is still a punishment, because it sucks(ever been grounded?), but you're right. In the rare case, that is the only route.
How about if someone with sleep disorders wants to commit a crime, and uses his illness as an alibi? One can be proven to be sick, but there is no way to prove the person was sleeping at the time. I know it's not a very likely scenario, but should be considered nonetheless.
If a person has disorders that are potentially dangerous to themselves and others, then it is that person's responsibility to make sure not to hurt anyone unintentionally (or intentionally, for that matter :P ). If the person takes no action of minimizing the risks of going on a sleep rampage while knowing it could happen, then should something happen the person has to be responsible for it, and punished accordingly.
If a person has disorders that are potentially dangerous to themselves and others, then it is that person's responsibility to make sure not to hurt anyone unintentionally (or intentionally, for that matter :P ). If the person takes no action of minimizing the risks of going on a sleep rampage while knowing it could happen, then should something happen the person has to be responsible for it, and punished accordingly.
And what if that person is unaware of their own condition? If they do not suspect that they are mentally ill(and I suspect most mentally ill people do not), then they won't go to a psychiatrist. Therefore, the only point where they go to a psychiatrist and actually get diagnosed would be after the fact, when they have already committed a crime. If you are unaware of something, then obviously you cannot take steps to prevent it. And besides, what do you want people to do? I suppose they could tie themselves down while sleeping, but what about other disorders? Force them to force themselves to stay in the house, lock the doors, constantly? What about people with unpredictable recurring episodes? How are they supposed to know when they're going to be a threat and when they're not? What I am basically saying here, is how are they meant to know and therefore prevent? I think it is a good idea on paper but once implemented it would be a bad idea.
How about if someone with sleep disorders wants to commit a crime, and uses his illness as an alibi? One can be proven to be sick, but there is no way to prove the person was sleeping at the time. I know it's not a very likely scenario, but should be considered nonetheless.
Hm, this is a good point. I suppose that, presuming of course the magic of science is moot at this point, sometimes people commit crimes and use their sickness, and sometimes their sickness drives them to commit these crimes and then cover up. Bad point, I know, but I am a little tired right now, so cut me some slack.
