Introduction
The analysis of criminality and people’s mental health contains not only the effect of inflicted harm on one’s mental stability but also the potential predisposition of people with mental illnesses towards violent behaviour. The recent portrayals of violent crimes against small or large groups of people have often mentioned mental illness as a characteristic that is prevalent among offenders (McGinty, Kennedy-Hendricks, Choksy, & Barry, 2016). This framing of criminals is used by the advocates of specific gun regulations in some countries.
They argue that the creation of a particular mental background check will lead to the reduced rate of violent crimes as people who may supposedly endanger others will be restricted from accessing firearms (Corner & Gill, 2015).
In states where gun control laws are strict, the connection between mental illness and violence is debated as well – this discussion can be focused on acts of violence and terrorism by individuals and groups (Corner & Gill, 2015). In this case, similar aspects of the stigma surrounding mental illness persist, including such characteristics as the lack of control and one’s aggressive tendencies. However, the question of whether mental illness has a direct link to violent behaviours remains underexplored by the public.
Scholarly research suggests that the stigma surrounding mental health and its correlation with gun violence and other crimes cannot be supported by evidence (McGinty et al., 2014a). While mental illness affects a person’s perception of the world, it does not determine one’s probability of engaging in crimes and does not always indicate the increased prevalence of violent behaviours.
The Issue and Suggested Connections
The main problem in the current representation of the correlation between mental illness and crime is the opinion that people with mental health problems are more likely than others to engage in illegal activities. This idea may be expressed by the public and exacerbated by media, advocates, and other influential speakers (Varshney, Mahapatra, Krishnan, Gupta, & Deb, 2016). The debate surrounding this concept often leads to people recollecting the incidents of gun violence, mass shootings, and lone-actor terrorist activity as situations that were initiated by people with mental illnesses.
The idea that one’s criminal behaviour can be reassessed based on their mental health also lies at the core of the crime-related legislation. Thus, when discussing the gun selling industry, some people suggest that a background check of a buyer’s mental health history can be used to allow or restrict gun usage (Swanson et al., 2016). In order to evaluate the arguments supporting and opposing this viewpoint, it is necessary to address the media representation of this problem, the public opinion and stigma related to mental health, as well as statistics and scholarly findings that consider the discussed links. The relationship between violent behaviours and mental illness traits can also be considered to provide a possible way of reforming the coverage of this problem.
Media Coverage
The basis of the discussed connection between crimes and mental illnesses is apparent in media coverage of illegal activities and some specific types of incidents. The primary example in which mental illness is used as the leading characteristic of an offender is the use of guns for lone-actor shootings and terrorist acts. It should be noted that the majority of the discussed situations occurred in the United States, although some recent accidents also happened in Europe and other countries.
According to McGinty, Webster, Jarlenski, and Barry (2014c), the prevalence of the offender being described as having a serious mental issue was substantial in stories covering gun violence. Similarly, McGinty et al. (2016) find that the use of this characteristic has greatly increased in the last fifteen to ten years. Thus, the framing of shooters as people with mental health problems became more popular than before in the media.
The effect of this coverage significantly alters the way the public views persons with mental illnesses. The stigma that surrounds people with depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and other conditions is now strongly associated with violence and lack of personal control, as well as sociopathic tendencies and failure to understand intimate boundaries (Swanson, McGinty, Fazel, & Mays, 2015a). As a contrast, according to research findings, individuals with mental illnesses are more likely to become targets of violent behaviour than its initiators (Monahan, Vesselinov, Robbins, & Appelbaum, 2017). Nonetheless, the developed viewpoint of mental health affects people’s perceptions about crime.
Findings on the Prevalence of Violent Actions
Many researchers have considered the correlation between violent behaviour (with the focus on shootings) and people with mental illnesses. Metzl and MacLeish (2015) point out that the public shares four main assumptions about this issue – a diagnosis of a mental illness can predict crimes, mental problems cause crimes, only mentally ill persons commit mass shootings, and these incidents cannot be prevented by gun control laws. These statements are included in the basis of many scholars’ hypotheses for researching the topic.
The findings of the mentioned above studies, however, do not agree with the public’s opinion. For instance, Swanson et al. (2016) discover that people with mental illnesses with access to firearms do not endanger other people as much as healthy individuals. On the other hand, they are more likely to endanger themselves due to mental health issues often being accompanied by suicidal ideations (Swanson et al., 2016).
Wintemute (2015) also states that mental illness does not contribute to violence towards others but is a serious factor in people’s rates of self-harm. The author argues that firearm ownership is one of the most prevalent factors in homicide cases (Wintemute, 2015). Therefore, the portrayal of the so-called “dangerous people” expressed in the media is in direct opposition to the statistics and scholarly findings.
Mass Shootings and Terrorism
The incidents that involve multiple victims or end in the attacker committing suicide are also often perceived through the lens of mental illness. Corner and Gill (2015) analyse the possibility of lone and group terrorists to have a mental disorder. They find that while individuals committing a terrorist crime alone are more likely to have mental health disturbances than terrorist group members, they also reveal that lone terrorists often act because of outside influence, stress, and prejudice (Corner & Gill, 2015). Therefore, the connection between criminality and mental illness is not direct – people’s behaviour is heavily influenced by other factors which may be linked to stigma or unrelated problems.
Studies about mass shooters also disparage the idea that these persons commit violent crimes due to having a mental health issue. Baumann and Teasdale (2018) conclude that the focus on mental illness is incorrect because people with mental problems and access to firearms constitute a more significant danger to themselves rather than society. The scholars urge the need to reframe the debate around mental illness and centre the discussion on the protection of persons with severe mental illness from harming themselves (Baumann & Teasdale, 2018). Whether these individuals possess a firearm or not, they can endanger themselves by not receiving proper treatment.
The Influence of Stigma on Mental Health Care
The problem of social barriers to accessing mental health care can also be noted in this discussion. The stigma supported by the media and the public can contribute to the individuals being reluctant to interact with health providers. According to Corrigan, Druss, and Perlick (2014), the problematic depiction of people with mental health issues as violent offenders puts people at risk of leaving their conditions untreated. This lack of care can result in individuals losing control of their cognitive abilities, experiencing chronic stress, and being unable to function in society. Therefore, one can suggest that such negative portrayal not only fails to encourage positive change but also exacerbates the problem and exposes more people to dangerous behaviours and self-harm.
These assumptions also impact the treatment of offenders with mental health issues. Skeem, Winter, Kennealy, Louden, and Tatar (2014) find that individuals with mental illnesses are more likely than others to be “brought back to prison custody” after parole (p. 212).
Moreover, the lack of treatment for these individuals is strongly correlated with the probability of recidivism. The scholars note that general factors such as antisocial behaviours and the lack of impulse control should be the main focus of recidivism prevention initiatives (Skeem et al., 2014). This argument notes that psychiatric therapy is not that crucial for everybody because offenders without mental illnesses possess social problems as well.
As a result, the discussed stigma also removes any distinctions between mental illness and aggression, conflating the two concepts and uniting them under one idea of uncontrolled behaviour. Swanson et al. (2015b) state that people who can become angry easily own firearms more often than others. This connection is found by the authors to be more significant than that including people with mental illnesses.
Moreover, they establish that only a small proportion of people with severe mental illnesses (such as serious forms of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia) tend to be violent towards others, while more than 95% of these individuals do not engage in any harmful behaviour (Swanson et al., 2015b). Other factors, including social isolation and substance abuse, contribute to the problem heavily, having a tangible impact on people both with and without mental health issues (Swanson et al., 2015b). The correlation between anger and mental illness that strongly affects the public perspective is, therefore, not supported by evidence.
People with mental health problems become victims of abuse or self-harm more often than perpetrators of crime. Monahan et al. (2017) find that violent victimisation of such persons by other individuals occurs in 43% of investigated cases, while violent behaviour is expressed in 28% and self-victimisation in 23% (p. 517). Furthermore, approximately half of the study’s participants were involved at least in one type of violence. The scholars discover a strong correlation between violent behaviours and the history of abuse, stating that respondents were victimised as children by family members and other individuals (Monahan et al., 2017). Thus, it is possible to assume that the presence of mental illness is not the only contributing factor to violent behaviours.
Gun Control Laws, Crime Patterns, and Social Implications
The mentioned above idea that people with mental illnesses are the main perpetrators of crime in such incidents as mass shootings and violent attacks affects the ways in which some countries change their legislature. In the US, this is one of the common arguments for gun ownership proponents – this viewpoint distinguishes responsible firearms owners and supports limited possession of arms for certain groups of people, while not inflicting any changes on others.
McGinty, Webster, & Barry (2014b) disagree with this argument, basing their opposition on statistical findings and stating that gun ownership is a more impactful contributor to gun-related violence than mental illness. The idea that a background checking procedure is effective in reducing crimes directly challenges the research about mental health and abuse.
Other factors can affect the rate of crimes more effectively than people’s mental health. One of them is the concept of “contagion” – the spread of information about previous mass killings (Towers, Gomez-Lievano, Khan, MMubayi, & Castillo-Chavez, 2015). Social pressure and the combination of contagion and frequent exposure to violent events may contribute to a person’s urge to commit crimes. Other causes include the mentioned above possession of firearms, substance abuse, and prior history of violence.
Gun ownership is highlighted by Wintemute (2015) as the prevalent contributor to gun-related violence. It is also a factor that elevates the rates of suicide with the use of firearms (Towers et al., 2015). This link suggests that gun ownership endangers people with and without mental illnesses and poses a more significant threat than mental health problems.
Conclusion
The media portrayal of people with mental illnesses has a prevalence of negative characteristics, linking mental health disturbances with criminal activity. The main ideas that the public possesses correlate mental illnesses and crime, posing the concept of a “dangerous person” as the main reason for mass shootings and terrorist attacks. Scholarly research opposes this ideology and shows the lack of connection between violent crimes and mental health. In fact, some studies reveal that people with mental illnesses often become the target of abuse rather than its perpetrators. The existence of statistical findings refutes the argument that aims to approve mental health background checks as the sole barrier to purchasing firearms.
Moreover, this point of view fails to acknowledge other contributors to crime, some of which have a significant impact on criminal events. Gun ownership, whether legal or illegal, is a factor that affects the rate of shootings substantially. Other reasons include substance abuse and personality traits such as anger and aggressiveness. It should be noted that one’s personality should not be conflated with the existence of mental illness. The lack of social interaction and the inability to relate to other people’s emotions also should not viewed only as mental health problems.
The discrepancy in proposed viewpoints and scholarly findings suggests that mental illness remains to be stigmatised since it is linked to violence and lack of self-control. The debate about firearms in such countries as the US and the focus on mental illness as the main contributor to violent offences hinders the effectiveness of health care services and stops people from seeking professional assistance. More than that, it contributes to offenders with mental health issues having problems with receiving parole or asking for support after being freed. The connection between crime and mental health is indirect in cases where people with mental illnesses act as perpetrators.
References
Baumann, M. L., & Teasdale, B. (2018). Severe mental illness and firearm access: Is violence really the danger? International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 56, 44-49.
Corner, E., & Gill, P. (2015). A false dichotomy? Mental illness and lone-actor terrorism. Law and Human Behavior, 39(1), 23-34.
Corrigan, P. W., Druss, B. G., & Perlick, D. A. (2014). The impact of mental illness stigma on seeking and participating in mental health care. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 15(2), 37-70.
McGinty, E. E., Frattaroli, S., Appelbaum, P. S., Bonnie, R. J., Grilley, A., Horwitz, J.,… Webster, D. W. (2014a). Using research evidence to reframe the policy debate around mental illness and guns: Process and recommendations. American Journal of Public Health, 104(11), e22-e26.
McGinty, E. E., Kennedy-Hendricks, A., Choksy, S., & Barry, C. L. (2016). Trends in news media coverage of mental illness in the United States: 1995–2014. Health Affairs, 35(6), 1121-1129.
McGinty, E. E., Webster, D. W., & Barry, C. L. (2014b). Gun policy and serious mental illness: Priorities for future research and policy. Psychiatric Services, 65(1), 50-58.
McGinty, E. E., Webster, D. W., Jarlenski, M., & Barry, C. L. (2014c). News media framing of serious mental illness and gun violence in the United States, 1997-2012. American Journal of Public Health, 104(3), 406-413.
Metzl, J. M., & MacLeish, K. T. (2015). Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms. American Journal of Public Health, 105(2), 240-249.
Monahan, J., Vesselinov, R., Robbins, P. C., & Appelbaum, P. S. (2017). Violence to others, violent self-victimization, and violent victimization by others among persons with a mental illness. Psychiatric Services, 68(5), 516-519.
Skeem, J. L., Winter, E., Kennealy, P. J., Louden, J. E., & Tatar, G. R., 2nd. (2014). Offenders with mental illness have criminogenic needs, too: Toward recidivism reduction. Law and Human Behavior, 38(3), 212-224.
Swanson, J. W., Easter, M. M., Robertson, A. G., Swartz, M. S., Alanis-Hirsch, K., Moseley, D.,… Petrila, J. (2016). Gun violence, mental illness, and laws that prohibit gun possession: Evidence from two Florida counties. Health Affairs, 35(6), 1067-1075.
Swanson, J. W., McGinty, E. E., Fazel, S., & Mays, V. M. (2015a). Mental illness and reduction of gun violence and suicide: Bringing epidemiologic research to policy. Annals of Epidemiology, 25(5), 366-376.
Swanson, J. W., Sampson, N. A., Petukhova, M. V., Zaslavsky, A. M., Appelbaum, P. S., Swartz, M. S., & Kessler, R. C. (2015b). Guns, impulsive angry behavior, and mental disorders: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R). Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 33(2-3), 199-212.
Towers, S., Gomez-Lievano, A., Khan, M., Mubayi, A., & Castillo-Chavez, C. (2015). Contagion in mass killings and school shootings. PLoS One, 10(7), e0117259.
Varshney, M., Mahapatra, A., Krishnan, V., Gupta, R., & Deb, K. S. (2016). Violence and mental illness: what is the true story? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 70(3), 223-225.
Wintemute, G. J. (2015). The epidemiology of firearm violence in the twenty-first century United States. Annual Review of Public Health, 36, 5-19.