The imaginary scenario: Johnny, 17, has been involved in a violent fight in a British town centre on a Friday night. He was heavily drunk and glassed another man with a broken bottle, scarring him for life. He then fled the police in a stolen car, causing thousands of pounds of damage in the process. He has been brought before court. Although the court may not know about it, he has a long track record of trouble with the police and other authorities – he has been excluded from four schools, for example.
The defence are arguing that Johnny suffers from undiagnosed APD (see 3.3, 3.4 of the textbook) – and that therefore he was unable to make better choices. Imagine you have been commissioned as professional psychologists / psychiatrists to assess Johnny and make recommendations to the judge for sentencing.
Focus on the three words DIAGNOSIS, CAUSE and TREATMENT:
- Does Johnny qualify as APD? You will need a list of analytical information for diagnosis – what are you looking for in order to decide if he has APD?
- What are the likely causes of his full / borderline APD? Do these causes lead us to conclude something about whether he was able to choose his actions?
- With both Johnny’s own good, and the protection of the public, in mind – what recommendation will you make to the judge? How ought Johnny to be sentenced – or treated? Be as specific as possible if you recommend some treatment.
DBS Psychology 