Essay on Oprah Winfrey Childhood

Essay on Oprah Winfrey Childhood

Early childhood

Physical development

She learned to ride a bike at the age of 7 She grew steadily In her childhood her head was 90% of the size of an adult however her body was not developed as this happened in adolescence. By the age of 4, Oprah was able to throw and kick large objects such as a ball. She was brutally raped at the age of 9 and sexually abused from the ages of 9 to 13 (adolescence). She learned to use proper utensils like a knife and fork when she was 4-5. She lived in poverty growing up and it was hard to sometimes get food on the table – this will have affected her diet due to her not having the money to buy the food she needed.

Up to the age of six while living on her grandmother’s farm she was expected to collect water from a well each day and take it to the house because she didn’t have running water- this would have been a physically demanding job for a young girl she would have had to have been physically healthy. She was so poor that some of her clothes were made out of potato sacks. Despite her living in these conditions, she was a healthy and energetic child.

Intellectual

Under the strong influence of her Grandmother Oprah developed the skills to read and write at the age of 3 – her grandmother helping her let her do great things in the future. She was a gifted speaker and she would often speak in church, women’s groups, and school. The lack of food could have affected her intellectual development as her brain wouldn’t have had as much energy to learn. At a very young age, Oprah was able to recite complicated speeches without any problems – her brain learned quicker than most kids her age. She was used to the spotlight and the center of attention which is very normal for children aged 3-8

Emotional

Oprah and her mother moved around a lot when she was younger – this affected her emotional development as she might have not wanted to move around or may have become attached to a certain place and then forced to move.

At the age of 7, she moved in with her father and her stepmother and she received her first bed and bedroom – it was maybe scary for her to move again but this time with her father, and then a joyous day as she got something she probably wanted. When she was 9 she was first sexually abused – this probably affected her for the rest of her life and at the time changed the way she acted.

Winfrey attended Lincoln High School in Milwaukee, but after early success in the Upward Bound program, was transferred to the affluent suburban Nicolet High School. Upon transferring, she said she was continually reminded of her poverty as she rode the bus to school with fellow African Americans, some of whom were servants of her classmates’ families.

Oprah was named after Orpah a character in the bible but her name was spelled wrong on the birth certificate so she was then known as Oprah – this could have maybe confused her true identity.

From the age of six, she lived between her parents and moved around a lot- this is because her parents weren’t together this may have led to insecurity about where she belonged. She had a half-sister to her mother who was adopted – she only learned of her existence when she was an adult. Her mother gave birth to her sister Patricia but her mother was having a very hard time raising two daughters so Oprah moved to Nashville with her father – this may have made her feel unwanted and unloved as she was the one chosen to move away from her mother.

Social

She moved around a lot as a child. Her social development was assisted by the pageants that she joined because she was able to interact and form relationships with her peers. She started kindergarten and was quickly moved up to first grade – this probably affected her as she probably made friends in kindergarten and then was forced to make new older friends. As a child, she played games interviewing her corncob doll and the crows on the fence of her family property. Moving from place to place and living between her parents it was most likely she didn’t develop strong friendship groups in her young years.

Serial Killers with Normal Childhoods: Childhood Trauma Influence to Become a Serial Killer?

Serial Killers with Normal Childhoods: Childhood Trauma Influence to Become a Serial Killer?

Introduction

Since the first records of a serial killer, dated back to the early 1890s, countless questions have been raised about what causes a person to act in this manner. “What goes on in the mind of a serial killer?” and “What is the cause of the urge to harm others?” Many questions have been asked in accordance with the mind of a killer, nature vs nurture being a common one. Is a killer created through genetics passed down through the generations? (Nature), or through the environment, they are brought up in (Nurture)? Through conducting this research, I hope to get a clearer understanding of the mind of a killer and what leads them to commit such heinous crimes. I will be researching the question “To what extent does childhood trauma and experiences influence one to become a serial killer?”. To thoroughly understand and answer this question, certain key areas must be looked into such as the mental health of serial killers, what percentage of them dealt with an unfortunate or traumatic childhood, if genetics do in fact play a part and the well-known characteristics of a killer and how these characteristics are adopted.

Mental Health and Serial Killers

A person’s mental health can seriously affect their actions and how they live life. There are many different types of mental illnesses that affect serial killers and are often a key area into the severity of their actions. One of the most common mental illnesses found in serial killers is Schizophrenia (WebMD, 2020). Schizophrenia is an illness that affects the prefrontal cortex and the limbic system and is characterised by delusions, hallucinations, disorganised speech and behaviour (Hurley, 2018). Whilst the causes of Schizophrenia are not fully understood, it could be inherited from a family member, or due to complications during birth or pregnancy. Although poor mental health and personality disorders do not necessarily create serial killers, there is a heightened risk with people who have certain personality and mental disorders. There are many different mental disorders that are most often found in serial killers, and they affect each person differently. There have been cases where a person has lived with dead bodies and treated them as family. This shows a serious problem of low self-esteem caused by rejection. This sense of rejection can be so profound that serial killers prefer living with dead bodies to overcome the fear of rejection.

The brain study at the University of Wisconsin, Madison also noticed a drop in connectivity between the amygdala and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. When connectivity is low, people have lower levels of empathy and aren’t easily ashamed by their actions. (Yardley, 2015) This is often found in serial killers, enabling them to commit heinous crimes and feel no compassion or empathy. In addition to this, researchers theorise that damage to the frontal lobe, the hypothalamus and the limbic system can cause extreme aggression, loss of control, and poor judgment. (Yardley, 2015). Another well recognised disorder in serial killers is Antisocial Personality disorder. Antisocial personality disorder affects 47% of male killers and 21% of female killers. (WebMD, 2020) This disorder affects the frontal lobe and causes a person to show no or little regard for the rights or feelings of others. Much like Schizophrenia, the cause of Antisocial Personality disorder is not well known, however it is thought to be linked to genetics, physical abuse in early life or an unstable childhood. Research has shown that many, if not all serial killers have some form of mental disorder, whether it be a personality disorder or psychotic disorder.

Serial Killers Who Had Childhood Trauma

A traumatic childhood can be distressing for anyone and can often have lifelong effects. This is especially true for some serial killers. According to a child abuse and serial murder study by Mitchell and Aamodt, 74% of serial killers suffered from psychological abuse as a child and 42% suffered from physical abuse from a young age (Fiona Guy, 2020). This is not saying that every case of abuse as a child leads to the child becoming a criminal, but it has been proven that there is a heightened risk associated with childhood trauma and anti-social behaviours for personality disorders and criminal activity later in life (Fiona Guy, 2020).

The serial killer group being tested in this study reported six times more abuse during childhood than the general population (Mitchell, 2005). This shows a traumatic childhood’s disastrous effects on a person. Not all the killers in this study necessarily suffered from physical abuse in their early years, this could be anything from psychological abuse, sexual abuse or even witnessing sexual or physical abuse against another. According to the book “Whoever fights monsters” by Robert Ressler, 40% of the serial killers interviewed reported being physically beaten and abused in their childhoods, with 70% reporting they had “witnessed or been part of sexually stressful events” as children. (Robert Ressler, 1992). Other historical factors common in serial killers are abuse, trauma, insecure attachment, loss or abandonment of a parent or caretaker, antisocial behaviour, head injury and low arousal levels.

Familial contributions include the physical absence or lack of personal involvement by one or both parents and alcohol or drug dependency by one or both parents (Rebecca Taylor, 2019). There are however some very famous serial killers such as Ted Bundy, Jeffery Dahmer, Richard Storlett and Paul Bernardo. These killers seem to be the nature side of the equation. Each one of these killers recall having a very loving and normal childhood. According to Ted Bundy, he had an “uneventful childhood”. His friends and family often backed up this claim (Kettler, 2019) and although his grandmother suffered from depression and agoraphobia and his grandfather had been described as “the owner of a raging temper”, no physical or psychological abuse was ever recorded or discussed. While there are some well-known serial killers who report having a “normal” and “uneventful” childhood, in most cases some form of abuse has been present.

Genetics and the Making of a Serial Killer

Although one of the main causes of creating a serial killer is childhood and environment, another element goes into creating a killer: genetics. The majority of well-known killers report some form of abuse in their early life, but for the few that do not deal with a traumatic childhood you have to wonder what causes their violent and psychopathic tendencies. A study led by Minnesota Professor Thomas Joseph Bouchard has shown that psychopathy is 60% inheritable This statistic shows that psychopathic tendencies are due more to DNA than upbringing (Berit Brogaard, 2018). In 1993, Dutch Professor Han Brunner discovered a MAOA gene mutation, now better known as the “Serial Killer Gene”.

MAOA (Monoamine-oxidase-A) is the gene that is responsible for breaking down molecules, specifically the neurotransmitters serotonin, epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine. When someone has a MAOA mutation, these neurotransmitters can build up in the brain, making it harder for someone to control impulses. Having this gene can lead to aggressive or violent outbursts, which is the reason it has been give the nickname “Serial Killer Gene” or “Warrior Gene” (Stieg, 2019). This gene has been associated with various psychiatric disorders. Jeffrey Dahmer is just one of the well-known killers who had a somewhat normal upbringing. He was often described as a very energetic and joyful child until he underwent a surgery to correct a double hernia at the age of 4. Following the surgery, he became increasingly withdrawn and by his early teens he was detached, tense and largely unpopular.

He claims that by the age of 14, his compulsions toward necrophilia and murder began. His childhood upbringing was classified as “normal” meaning that his violent and psychopathic tendencies are purely genetic/mental. When looking into male serial killers it was found that majority of male serial killers have much higher levels of testosterone in their body than the average man. It has been found that when testosterone levels are high and serotonin levels are low, it tends to lead to increased aggression and sadistic behaviour (Scott, 2000). Of course, we are all capable of being aggressive, of containing unimaginable aggressive fantasies of torture, sadism and murder, but we are not all serial killers. There is a boundary that exists between fantasy and reality and serial killers have lost that. Serial killers are made, but we all have an innate capacity for destructive aggression (Knight, 2007).

Characteristics of a Serial Killer

While no two killers are the same, specific characteristics can be found in most if not all, killers. According to the American Journal of Psychiatry, written by JM MacDonald, cruelty to animals, obsession with fire and bed wetting past the age of 5 are three characteristics that are found in most serial killers (MacDonald, 2018). Although many killers will have different motives, they often possess similar traits and are known to possess one, if not more of the following traits. The power junkie: Many killers often withhold crucial information to maintain some power. The egotistical bragger: Egoistical serial killers often can’t help but brag about the atrocities they’ve committed, whether it’s aimed at their accomplices, the next victim, law enforcement, or just themselves. The average joe: Some will try and hide in plain sight, posing as an active member of their community as not to draw suspicion. The manipulator: Apparent vulnerability and the need to please have been used effectively time and time again by serial killers as a way of hiding a sinister personality. The superficial charmer: Serial killers tend to have a very good grasp of other people’s emotions and are quick to pick up on any vulnerability or weakness in order to convince them to do things they normally wouldn’t (Elizabeth Yardley, 2015). Not only do they often maintain similar characteristics, but they will often go for similar victims depending on the person. In most cases, the victims of serial killers are physically weaker than them. Serial killers usually target children and women. A few serial killers have targeted old and middle-aged men, but for the most part, they concentrate on young women.

Psychopathy is a personality disorder manifested in people who use a mixture of charm, manipulation, intimidation, and occasionally violence to control others in order to satisfy their own selfish needs. Contrary to popular belief, not all serial killers are psychopaths and not all psychopaths are serial killers. However, more often than not, there are some characteristics of psychopathy found in serial killers. Another less common characteristic of serial killers is intelligence. Although they often lack formal education, many of the world’s most notorious serial killers actually have very high IQs. Rodney Alcala had an estimated IQ of 170. Some other notorious murderers with genius-level IQs include Ed Kemper (145), Jeffrey Dahmer (144), and Ted Bundy (136) (Young, 2018).

Conclusion

In writing this report, a link between childhood traumas and serial killers was formed and a better understanding of the innerworkings of a serial killer’s mind has been drawn. I have discovered that there are a range of different issues that come into play when creating a serial killer, and whilst not all serial killers may have the same reason for killing or the same childhood, there are often very similar causes for occupying the urge to kill. And whilst this is in no way saying that everyone who experiences trauma during childhood or has poor mental health goes on to become a serial killer, it is clear that there is a very strong link between childhood trauma and the creation of a killer. This written report will help the general public to better understand the consequences of childhood abuse. Any form of abuse as a child can have lifelong effects on a person and in not all but many cases, the affects can be deadly.

To What Extent does Childhood Trauma Influence Criminal Behaviour?

To What Extent does Childhood Trauma Influence Criminal Behaviour?

The debate on what the causes of criminal behaviour has been a long going one. Many have tried to explain and give reason for the actions of offenders. But at the end of every debate, people are left with the question: Is There a Connection Between Childhood Trauma and Criminal behaviour? And if there is there is a connection at all how much does their upbringing contribute to antisocial behaviour.

The Natural Institution of mental health defines childhood trauma as “The experience of an event by a child that is emotionally painful or distressful, which often results in lasting mental and physical effects”. However traumatic events can range from war related trauma such as terrorism or combat related, to school/community violence. So, it is important to understand that interpersonal childhood trauma will be the foundation in which childhood trauma and its influence on criminal behaviour will be discussed. Interpersonal childhood trauma can be understood as: trauma from something that is done to a child: witnessing or experiencing violence in family or home or sexual, physical and emotional abuse at home or elsewhere. Trauma from lack of nurture: physical and emotional neglect. Trauma due to caregivers suffering from their own trauma and are unable to meet the emotional needs of the child: Parent that are in prison, divorce of parents and parents misuse of substances such as alcohol or drugs. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization states that “early childhood defined as the period from birth to eight years old, is a time of remarkable growth with the brain development at its peak. During this stage, children are highly influence by the environment and the people that surround them”

Criminal behaviour is also a large branch with many definitions. However, the definition of what constitutes crime depends on the values of the society observed. (Reckless, W.C 1940).

But the definition of Criminal behaviour proposed by US Legal states that “Criminal behaviour refers to conduct of an offender that leads to and including the commission of an unlawful act” The essay will discuss the justification of criminal behaviour influenced by childhood trauma by this definition.

The ACE database has been collected as a result of a long-term collaboration between Kaiser Permanente in San Diego, California as well as the Centres for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta, Georgia. With over 17,000 participants, ACE wanted to find whether there is link between childhood trauma and health, social and economic consequences. The results were concluded that there is in fact a strong correlation between negative childhood experiences and later risks close to criminalism and other negative social consequences.

The questionnaire asked for information on negative childhood experiences that occurred before the inmates 18th birthday, relating to categories of abuse such as psychological, physical, sexual, neglect and family disfunction. In addition to these questions regarding drug abuse, mental illness and whether or not a family member had been imprisoned. Various studies using this data showed a strong correlation between those reporting abuse throughout childhood and that person’s own later willingness to engage in violence, whether sexual or physical. There is an increasing amount of data that has investigated criminal offenders and identified they were four times more likely than average to report the negative childhood incident.

Recently there have been studies examining the frequency of negative childhood events in juvenile offenders with a broad, general sample from the Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) database. ACEs are defined by the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as “potentially traumatic events that occur in childhood (0-17 years) such as experiencing violence, abuse, or neglect; witnessing violence in the home; and having a family member attempt or die by suicide. Also included are aspects of the child’s environment that can undermine their sense of safety, stability, and bonding such as growing up in a household with substance misuse, mental health problems, or instability due to parental separation or incarceration of a parent, sibling, or other member of the household”. One recent study conducted in Florida showed a definitive link between adverse childhood experience and juvenile offenders. The study was the first in the United States to specifically explore whether these adverse experiences was correlated to juvenile crime. The results show that, with 50% of juvenile offenders reporting four or more ACEs. The study, conducted by Michael T. Baglivio et al (2014), investigate The Prevalence of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) in the lives of Juvenile Offenders by examining the relationship between ACE for distinguishing offending patterns through late adolescence in a large sample of juvenile offenders. Baglivio et al (2014) used data from 64,329 juvenile offenders in Florida, majority of which were 18 years old. The sample used consisted of 29% white males, 9% white females, 34% black males and 9% black females, 13% Hispanic males, 3% Hispanic females. The study also used a Semi-Parametric Group Bases Method (SPGM) in order to identify the different latent groups of official offending trajectories based on the individual’s variation over time. A Multinomial logistics regression was used to explore which measures distinguished between trajectory groups. The findings indicate that five latent trajectory offending groups of offending through the age of 18 and that increased exposure to multiple adverse childhood experiences distinguishes early onsets and chronic offending from other patterns of offending. Baglivio et al concluded that childhood maltreatment as measure by the cumulative stressor adverse childhood experiences score influences official offending patterns.

Therefore, Baglivio (2014) proves that being exposed to adverse childhood experiences such as emotional, physical or sexual abuse or emotional and physical neglect, can not only increase an individual’s chance in committing criminal acts, but also increase chances of them re-offending. The variety in ethnicity also allows for the results to be better generalizable to the greater population. Furthermore, the use of the ACE questionnaire which focuses on the aspects of childhood trauma. This means the study has a standardised procedure allows for the study to be replicable, which in turn increases the reliability of the results. However, the reliability of the results may be in question due to potential demand characteristics from the juvenile offender which means that some results may not be an actual reflection of the extent to which childhood trauma influences criminal behaviour. This overall makes for a good study in answering my question.

A study conducted by Merih Altintas and Mustafa Bilici (2018) supports the idea that childhood trauma may be linked to criminal behaviour in adulthood. The objective of the study was the ‘Evaluation of childhood trauma with respect to criminal behaviour, dissociative experiences adverse family experiences and psychiatric backgrounds amount prison inmates.’ 200 prison inmates were used in this questionnaire-based study. The data on adverse family experiences during childhood, demographic characteristics and mental backgrounds were collected through a face to face interview. A psychometric evaluation was then conducted using the childhood trauma questionnaire (CTQ – 28) and Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES). The finding of the study show that several ACEs items were more common in females than in males. However, in male inmates there was a higher rate of substance abuse (48.0% vs 29.0%) and previous convictions (50.0% vs 25.0%). Males had a younger age at first crime (24.9  8.9 years vs 30.3  9.2 years) whereas females had higher rates of violent crimes (69.2% vs 30.8%). Altinta and Bilici also noted a significant relationship between CTQ total score and age of first offense. Altina et al concluded that the findings revealed a high prevalence of and significant associations among childhood trauma, dissociative experiences, adverse family experiences and psychiatric problems in a group of imprisoned males and females. Childhood trauma characterized by sexual abuse and violent crimes were found to be more predominate in female prison inmates, on the other hand a criminal background with a younger age of offence and repeated previous convictions, substance abuse and sexual crimes were more prevalent amounts male prison inmates. Thus, the findings indicate a potential link between childhood trauma and criminal behaviour in terms of subsequent offending.

Through Altintas and Bilici (2018) study it is evident that childhood trauma can be linked to criminal behaviour. Although, it does not directly apply to the severity of the offense, it does link to the criminal behaviour in terms of actually offending. However, the sample itself is too small when talking about the effects of childhood trauma, and thus the link between childhood trauma and criminal behaviour is up for debate. The use of face-to-face interviews could also be proven problematic. Since the questions asked by the interviewer are not specified, it is possible that there is some aspect of experimenter effect which influences the answers the participants gave. Conversely, the interview gives the researcher qualitative data, which is richer and more in-depth, thus allowing the conclusions drawn from the participants about the influence of childhood trauma and its influence on criminal behaviour to be more concrete. This study does act as a good piece of evidence in answering my question, however, the conclusion drawn only suggest a potential link and not a definite answer.

The next study conducted by Caparo et al (2013) investigates childhood relational trauma in a group of violent offenders from Italy. They hypothesized a higher level of early childhood trauma associated with higher scores on psychopathy. The participants in this study consisted of twenty-two offenders convicted for violent crime aged 22-60. Within this group 14 of them had committed murder, 4 had committed rape, 4 were convicted of child sex offenders. The Traumatic Experience Checklist (TEC; Nijhuis, van der Hart & Kruger, 2002) was used to asses childhood relational trauma which is a self-report measure addressing 29 types of potential traumatic events. The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; Hare, 2003) was used to asses psychopath. This is a 20-item measure scored on the basis of an interview and on file information. Caparo et al (2013) found that there was a high prevalence of childhood experiences of neglect and abuse among the offenders. Higher levels of childhood trauma were found with participants who obtained high scores in the PCL-R. Also noted was a significant negative association between age of first relational trauma and psychopathy scores. Thereby, Caparo et al (2013) concluded that early exposure to relational trauma in childhood can play a relevant role in the development of more sever psychopathic traits

Through this study, it is clear that not only does early childhood trauma result in criminal behaviour, but it can also result in the manifestation of psychopathic traits which results in committing more violent crimes. Which again does answer the question at hand.

The three studies conducted above therefore give evidence to the fact that criminal behaviour is in fact influenced by childhood trauma. However, following decades of analysis and prevention campaigns early interpersonal trauma remains an understudied subject matter, especially when it comes to identifying protective factors such as partner support or certain personality traits, that may have an effect on psychological and rational adult functioning. Furthermore, it is evident through the studies that early relationships are do affect the rational thinking of individuals, and thus has an effect on whether or not criminal behaviours are exhibited and to what degree. The challenges related to the event of such studies lie in the abundance of intrapersonal, environmental, and interpersonal variables that has to be examined which I believe would be better studied using longitudinal and structured analysis protocols. With this in mind, future studies should focus on following childhood interpersonal trauma survivors through many years as attainable, while investigating specific variables within the survivor’s close relationships (e.g., parental, social and partner support). Integrative models such as the Biopsychosocial model by Geroge Engel, 1977 which suggest that the reason for certain behaviours, may be due to a combination of factors as to supposed to just childhood trauma in this case. Additionally, both psychological and relational variables should also be examined in order to better perceive the survivor’s psychological and social development following childhood interpersonal trauma (Dugal et al, 2019)

One of the many arguments used to justify the actions of offenders is that it is in the offender’s personality to do things against the law and this is predetermined by genes passed down from parent to child. But to understand why one’s personality might be used to justify their actions; it is important to understand what the term personality means. multiple theories have been proposed on what is meant by the term personality thus there is not one set definition for personality, many psychologists put forward their interpretation of what a personality is. “That is which permits a prediction of what a person will do in a given situation” (Raymond B. Cattell, 1950). “Although no single definition is acceptable to all personality theorists, we can say that personality is a pattern of relatively permanent traits and unique characteristics that give both consistency and individuality to a person’s behaviour” (Feist and Feist 2009). Although there are multiple definitions of personality, most focus on the pattern of behaviours and characteristics that can help predict and explain a person’s behaviour. The American Psychology Association defines personality as “individual differences in characteristic patterns of thinking, feeling and behaving” However, explanations for personalities can focus on multiple influences, ranging from genetic, to environmental. However, can we predict the personality of individuals based on the lineage, or their surrounding? And if so, is there a pattern which arises with certain individuals such as criminals.

In this case, the environment should not be simply labelled as the biosphere in which all living animals inhabit but should be seen as the surroundings of specific individuals. Economic distress, influences and interventions, peers, family, racial and ethnic composition, community, media and technology (Paramma B Kuravatti, Rajkumar P Malipatli 2017) These are aspects of the environment that shape the personality of an individual. People learn from their environment, learning being defined as the “process of acquiring new, or modifying existing, knowledge, behaviour, skills, values or preferences” (Richard Gross, 2012) because this is what people are most exposed to and to understand these and their influences on our outlook on life should allow us to determine which aspect has the greater effect on an individual and which of these aspects are more present in individuals who display criminal behaviour.

Albert Bandura’s Social learning theory (SLT) proposed in 1925 suggest that learning occurs directly, through operant conditioning, but also indirectly, through observation and imitation of others within a social context. Bandura believed in the behaviourist approach of learning, the idea that much of our behaviour is based from experience. This can suggest that we engage in either criminal or noncriminal behaviour based on the social environment around us and that we’re especially influenced by how other people reward or model behaviour. Operant condition consists of only positive and negative reinforcement, however the SLT, introduces Vicarious reinforcement. For indirect learning to take place, an individual has to observe behaviour of others. The learner may copy this behaviour and make it their own, but this would only be the case of the behaviour is seen to be rewarded, reinforcing the behaviour, rather than being punished, therefore, the learner not only observes the behaviour, but most importantly observes the consequences of a behaviour. “Most human behaviour is learned observationally through modelling: from observing others, one form an idea of how new behaviours are performed, and on later occasions this coded information serves as a guide for action” (Bandura, 1977)

Bandura conducted an experiment in 1961 which could allow researchers to better understand the fundamentals behind learning aggressive behaviours. The aim of the study was to investigate if social behaviours, such as aggression, can be acquired by observation and imitation (Bandura, Ross and Ross 1961) the participants were first judged by a 5-point rating scale in order to test for aggression. Children with the same level of aggression were placed into the same group. Furthermore, in order to reach a significant inter-rater reliability, two researchers rated 51 children independently and then the rates where compared thus increasing the reliability of the experiment. The experiment was manipulated in 3 conditions: Aggressive model shown to 24 kids, Non-aggressive model shown to 24 kids and no model shown 24 kids (control condition). The most important aspect of the experiment is the procedure in which the children’s behaviour were manipulated. The first stage of each condition was the modelling stage, in which the children were shown individuality a model behaving aggressively to a ‘Bobo Doll’ where they would proceed to attack the doll using different items and shouting words such as “Pow” and “Boom”. In the second stage was the aggressive arousal, in which the children would play with an attractive toy and then told that they weren’t allowed to play with it. The aim being to induce mild aggression in the children. The final stage was then to test for delayed imitation, the children were presented with aggressive and non-aggressive toys and observed through a one-way mirror for 20 minutes. Bandura found that children who observed the aggressive where more likely to imitate the same aggressive behaviours observed. Specifically, boys tended to imitate more physically same sex models than girls did, whereas girls displayed more verbal aggression if the model was female. Thus, Bandura concluded that his findings do support his learning Social learning theory. The study has a standardized procedure which means that the study is easily replicable. Bandura reconducted the experiment again in 1963 and found that the findings were the same.

Banduras study does state that behaviours can be learnt and then replicated during a different moment in time. With this in mind it can also be deduced that exposure to constant aggressive behaviour will lead to an increase aggressive individual, thus shaping their personality to be more erratic and aggressive. Furthermore,

Childhood Trauma VS Serial Killers

Childhood Trauma VS Serial Killers

One’s childhood has a significant impact on that person for the remainder of their life. But to what extent? I will be addressing childhood abuse & trauma and how that relates too criminal activity and mostly focus on serial killers. There is a trend with abuse and childhood trauma and that correlating into serial killers and criminal activity. Not all abused children become serial killers; also, not all serial killers have a past of childhood abuse or childhood trauma. Still, the correlation between the two cannot be ignored (Nicola, Davies, 2018). Personal trauma, especially from childhood, has a high impact on one’s decision making. According to Dr. Adrian Raine, biological factors and environmental factors contribute to making criminals. There are an estimated 1,500 known serial killers in history, and according to research and interviews, more than half of those were victims of abuse under the age of 18.

Childhood trauma is a significant factor when it comes to future crime as an adult. According to a 2015 Children’s Bureau report, nationally, over 7 million U.S. children encounter Child Protective Services, which is about 37% of American children before the age of 18 (Tikkanen, 2018). Studies show that about 80% of 21-year-olds abused at a younger age became diagnosed or met the criteria for at least one psychological disorder (Tikkanen, 2018). Children introduced to alcohol abuse, drug abuse, and domestic violence at a young age have a higher risk of displaying these same behaviors. Symptoms that can result from children raised in an abusive home, ages 6 to 12 years, include: seductive or manipulative behavior, eating disturbances, distrustful of people, fear of being abandoned, difficulty concentrating in school, temper tantrums, become a bully or have a quick temper. Fortunately, not all children have a negative impact after experiencing trauma despite staggering statistics for outcomes of long-term effects; for others, it can deeply traumatize them into a life of desolation., or worse.

‘Childhood trauma does not come in one single package.’ ― Asa Brown ‘Deeply traumatic experiences, especially during childhood, can have an even deeper impact in adult life’ (Davies, 2018), this leads us to many questions, some of which include; What makes a murderer? Are serial killers born or made, and how does childhood abuse play a factor in this? According to criminologist Dr. Adriane Raine, both biological and social factors contribute to the making of a murderer (Davies, 2018). Studies conducted and involved examining and decoding the criminal mind, which broke down how different types of child abuse can be used to profile serial killers. The results ended with ‘4 serial killer typologies — lust and rape, anger, power, and financial gain — and three categories of child abuse — psychological, sexual, and physical’ (Davies, 2018).

Researchers from Radford University in Virginia conducted a study to and compared the child abuse history of 50 convicted U.S. serial killer against the general population. The results showed significantly higher and more traumatic reports of abuse in the serial killer group. (Guy, 2015). The presence of child abuse in the history of serial killers is not a new topic and draws much attention and perplexes criminologists and psychologists alike to determine what makes one person turn towards killing while another turns tragedy into something constructive. A great quote from Robert Ressler on this topic- ‘Let me state that there is no such thing as the person who at age thirty-five suddenly changes from being perfectly normal and erupts into totally evil, disruptive, murderous behavior. The behaviors that are precursors to murder have been present and developing in that person’s life for a long, long time – since childhood.’ – Robert Ressler, ‘Whoever Fights Monsters’

Fiona Guy wrote in her paper that ‘Psychopathic killers, those who show psychopathic traits in their personalities and behaviors, have become increasingly of interest to scientists and particularly neuroscientists. Along with forensic psychologists and criminologists, they are looking for differences within the brains of psychopathic serial killers as a further way to understand their behavior’ (Guy, 2015).

A 2005 study in the Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology revealed that the prevalence of childhood sexual abuse among serial killers was 26 percent, while 36 percent had experienced physical violence, and 50 percent had been psychologically abused as children. (Dowart, 2018) There are three notorious serial killers whose childhood was that of nightmares, Manson, Wuornos, and Ramirez. Charles Manson, probably one of the most well-known, had a volatile upbringing. His mother was 16 when he was born and arrested multiple times for armed robbery when Manson was a child. He did not know his father and spent time in boys’ schools, where he claimed to be raped by other students. In and out of jail and juvie centers before he led a violent cult.

Next is serial killer Aileen Wuornos who was sexually abused as a child and homeless as a teen after being thrown out of her home. ‘Wuornos claims she was a victim of extensive sexual abuse at the hands of her grandfather and possibly others. At 14, she gave birth to a child—whom she claims was fathered by her brother, Keith—in a home for unwed teen mothers. (Dowart, 2018) She then took to the streets selling her body for sex on Florida’s highways. In 1989 she killed a man who picked her up for sex, which she claimed was self-defense and that the man was a rapist, then continued her killing spree, in the same manner, killing at least six other men.

Richard Ramirez, the ‘Night Stalker.’ Raped and brutalized more than two dozen people killing at least 13. He claimed to have been exposed to toxic fumes when younger and exposure to pollution from nuclear bomb testing. Ramirez and his six siblings were born with multiple birth defects, illnesses, mental and congenital disabilities, which most likely is contributed to the exposure of toxic chemicals, both invitro and through childhood. Aside from toxins, the father of Ramirez was physically abusive to the family, and older cousin Michael exposed Ramirez to photos of women who were mutilated, raped, and murdered. Ramirez also witnessed Michael killing his wife in a brutal shooting and was threatened not to tell anyone. Not long after, as to no surprise, Ramirez joined the world of drugs and crime, which lead him to spend his teen years in juvenile detention centers. As a young adult, he then turned to rape, robberies, and murder. At 29 years old, Ramirez was charged and convicted on 46 counts of murder and sentenced to death.

Is it genetic, hormonal, biological, or cultural conditioning? Do serial killers have any control over their desires? Serial killers have tested out several excuses for their behavior, but one common platform that they all share is that at one time in their life they, themselves were the victims of abuse. According to an article on this topic, ‘identifying a future serial killer isn’t an exact science, there are a few signs that may help to identify people who have the greatest potential to become a serial killer. These traits can typically foreshadow the violent activities the killers engage in later in life but are not linked directly to serial behavior’ (Crime Museum, 2017). That said, not all childhood victims of abuse turn to murder or crime, but anyone subjected to a traumatic event at a young age is bound to have some underlying effect from it. Prolonged exposure greatens the consequences and, if untreated, can condition a once stable, mentally sound child into an unstable adult with severe mental disorders. Any adolescent who displays psychopathic tendencies after being a victim of abuse is at extreme risk of developing into a serial killer when they reach adulthood.

References

  1. (2017). Retrieved from Crime Museum: https://www.crimemuseum.org/crime-library/serial-killers/early-signs/
  2. Davies, N. (2018). From Abused Child to Serial Killer. Psychiatry Advisor.
  3. Dowart, L. (2018). Manson, Wuornos, Ramirez: 3 Famous Killers with Exceptionally Screwed-Up Childhoods. Real Crime.
  4. Guy, F. (2015). Serial Killers and Childhood Abuse: Is There a Link? Crime Traveler.
  5. Tikkanen, M. (2018). Invisible Children. Child Abuse Statistics and the best resources.

Serial Killers: Childhood Influence

Serial Killers: Childhood Influence

Drilling a hole into the top of a man’s skull which he would pour sulphuric acid in (How Serial Killers are born). This process was acted out to make his victim brain dead: almost zombie-like. The victim would typically be dead within the day. Once the victim died, the murderer would dismember the body, disposing of the victim’s parts into vats of acid, except for the skull. (How Serial Killers are born) This was the mind of notorious serial killer Jeffery Dahmer, who murdered for his own impulse and desire. Over time as similar incidents occurred, scientists researched to try to understand why people would commit these horrendous acts of violence. (How Serial Killers are born) The key linking idea between nearly all serial killers was that they had all experienced a traumatic childhood. (Jeffrey Dahmer: Psychopathy and neglect, Serial Murderers and their childhood environments, creation of a serial killer) It can be said that a serial killer’s childhood can impact their life later on influencing the choices they will make.

What is a Serial Killer? Characteristically serial killers have been identified as a murderer who has taken the lives of three or more people. Serial killers are nearly always driven by their own psychological needs and a majority of the cases it would be the killer’s sexual fantasies that drove their violent tendencies (Jeffrey Dahmer: Psychopathy and neglect). Another important identifying characteristic about serial killers is that they have a cool down period between each murder. (Aggression and violent behaviour). The FBI has also made a serial killer profile: “White male, low-middle socioeconomic status, in his 20s or 30s, has a history of childhood abuse or neglect, is sociopathic and/or psychopathic, is a chameleon to his environment and can appear normal” (Jeffrey Dahmer: Psychopathy and neglect).

The FBI has also announced that this is just a generalised stereotype and that serial killers come from all walks in life. It doesn’t matter what age, race or gender. Victims of serial killers tend to be complete strangers to the murder with no financial gain connections between the victim and the killer. This typically makes it more difficult for law enforcements to catch these people, with the only linking factor between each murder being symbolic meaning behind each victim. Serial killers usually kill their victims based on the fantasies that they have. (Netflix inside criminal minds) For instance, someone who had a violent and dominant mother may choose victims that resemble their mother and proceed to dominate, and kill the victim (Netflix inside criminal minds). Normally before the murder they would proceed to make his victim beg him to let them live by putting their life in the murderer’s hands, making him feel authoritative which can put them in a type euphoria mind set. This can cause sexual arousal at the fact that in his mind he is getting revenge for all that his mother did. Once dead, the murderer might participate in necrophilia behaviours on the body. (Netflix inside criminal minds).

One key traumatic experience most serial killers experience is child abuse. Child abuse can be well-defined as an act or multiple acts of violence that will always harm the victim (How Serial Killers are born). The person that most times would be abusing the child is his/her caregiver or parent: this parental figure can also threaten harm towards the child which can also be traumatic for the child. In cases of physical abuse, the child may be victim of biting, hitting, pushing, kicking, burning, genital mutilation, beating and being held underwater (Jeffrey Dahmer: Psychopathy and neglect). People who were exposed to this behaviour from their parental figures typically have a stunted growth in their own personal development as a consequence of the abuse they received as a child (Jeffrey Dahmer: Psychopathy and neglect). To take into account children who receive physical punishment from a parent, such as spanking, can also have a physiological impact on the child receiving the punishment (Jeffrey Dahmer: Psychopathy and neglect), however whether or not it was traumatic enough to say that these people will later become serial killer’s is still debated Serial Murderers and their childhood environments discusses that children have to experience. Child abuse affects children because it impacts their cognitive skills at a young age basically stunting them of any personal development. Usually consisting of poor emotional skills, most likely causing anti-social behaviours, these cases were more predominate in children who are not only exposed to acts of abuse preformed on themselves by a parental figure but also domestic violence of one or more of these figures (Serial Murderers and their childhood environments).

Children can be exposed to other forms of abuse, such as sexual abuse. Sexual abuse of children can be characterised as sexual exploitation of offspring; participating in the rape, prostitution, pornography or molestation of children under the age of consent. (Jeffrey Dahmer: Psychopathy and neglect) Children who are exposed to these experiences, without appropriate relations with parents or caregivers typically do not understand “normal” interactions. They find it difficult to intergrade into society especially when trying to begin a romantic relationship. This usually leads to frustration as they are confused and since they have not developed the correct coping mechanisms they can become violent towards their partners (Jeffrey Dahmer: Psychopathy and neglect, How Serial Killers are born, Netflix inside criminal minds). However, this up bringing doesn’t always mean that you are destined to become Murderous as Serial Murderers and their childhood environments discusses that these events can trigger mental illnesses such as depression, anxiety, lack of self-confidence etc. but for these experiences to influence these people to commit these crimes they typically need to endure a traumatic experience that would destabilise their mental cognitive stability over time.

Essay on John Wayne Gacy Childhood

Essay on John Wayne Gacy Childhood

The following paper is on the life of John Wayne Gacy, one of the most famous serial killers of all time. The sources were cited through a book on John Wayne Gacy’s biography, a documentary on his life as well as the years where he committed the crimes. An article by a former police officer who oversaw bringing Gacy finally in and a textbook where his crimes are defined through law and how someone like Gacy was criminally charged for his doings. John Wayne Gacy as a child was abused physically and mentally by his father. It is believed that the reason for all his crimes was because of the abuse. His father used to sexually abuse him which John in life later did to his victims as well. John came from nothing in his broken home and made a name for himself as he grew older as a successful white-collar worker. Hopping from successful job to successful job, receiving promotions often. John was also married quite a few times and divorced for various reasons. Alcohol, dishonesty, and unfaithfulness. Ultimately, he told his final wife that he was indeed gay, and that sparked this monster. Throughout his work years, he was intrigued by the thought of the younger crowd instead of the older more experienced workers. He was convincing to most because he felt that the younger workers were more energetic and would have a longer working career in the companies that he was managing. John had ulterior motives, which later down the line makes sense. He would have his young workers over for special occasions and lured them in by making the occasion seem like business-related meetings, before knocking young men unconscious, raping them, and the majority except for a few escaped deaths. John Wayne Gacy was convicted of 33 murders in the first degree along with sexual assaulting/raping the young men. Most of John’s victims were underage, in today’s world, we call that statutory rape. He received a nickname that people would be more than likely to recognize more than his actual name, ‘The Killer Clown.’ The few victims who escaped their almost certain deaths remember vividly that John used to dress up like a clown and torture his victims before raping and murdering them. John committed his crimes between 1972 to 1976. We’re getting away with things was much easier than what they are today.

A Born Killer

John Wayne Gacy was born in Chicago, Illinois on March 17, 1942. (Ellis & Meyer, 1999). John was one of three, and as a child was extremely overweight and clumsy. He was a bright intelligent young man who was family-oriented and close with his sisters and mother but had a difficult relationship with his alcoholic father, who was often physically abusive towards his wife and children (Ellis & Meyer, 1999). Gacy had a relatively happy childhood, although he did go through a few traumatic experiences. At age nine, he was sexually molested by a friend of his father; at 11 he was struck in the head by a swing, leaving a blood clot that caused him to suffer blackouts throughout the rest of his childhood (Ellis & Meyer, 1999). Shortly after, he failed to graduate high school due to his health and troubled home life. He decided to move to Las Vegas where he got a job at a funeral parlor as a janitor, only lasting three months. He decided to return home to Chicago and enroll in a business school. After graduating, he found employment with Nunn-Bush Shoe Company and eventually was so thrilled with his work that he was transferred to Springfield, Illinois as a management trainer. While in Springfield, Gacy became involved in several community organizations, most notably, the Jaycees, even eventually becoming the first vice president (Ellis & Meyer, 1999).

The Start

In 1964 he married a co-worker by the name of Marylynn Myers and in that same year had his first homosexual experience. According to Gacy, one of his coworkers boozed him and sexually assaulted him. Gacy stayed in Springfield until 1966, his father-in-law then offered him the chance to run various Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurants that he had owned in Waterloo, Iowa. Soon enough Gacy and his wife had moved to Iowa, where she had given birth to a son, Michael Gacy in 1967 and a daughter Christine in 1968. Marylynn was a stay-at-home mom as John was operating the father-in-law’s restaurants and still worked with the Jaycees (Ellis & Meyer, 1999). Things seemed good for the Gacy’s, but this was just the beginning. Rumors around town that John had been gay, but those who worked closely with him denied the claims. Shortly after, in May of 1968, they had reason to rethink the assessment when John was arrested for sexual assault on a 15-year-old named Donald Voorhees (Ellis & Meyer, 1999) Voorhees almost didn’t show up to court because Gacy had hired another teenager to beat up Voorhees. Once matters finally came to court, Gacy pled guilty to a charge of Sodomy and received a 10-year sentence (Ellis & Meyer, 1999). Marylynn Myers then divorced John Gacy and gained full custody of their children (Ellis & Meyer, 1999). John would never see his children again.

Post Prison

In prison, surprisingly he was considered a leader and model inmate. His good behavior led him to release only 18 months into his 10-year sentence. He immediately returned to Chicago to visit his mother and father. His father had passed while he was imprisoned, and John was full of regret because they could never settle their differences. Gacy at this time was unemployed, divorced, and didn’t have much to his name. He stayed in his hometown of Chicago got a job as a chef and bought a house with his mother’s assistance right outside of Chicago. (Ellis & Meyer, 1999). In 1972, Gacy remarried Carole Hoff, who was recently divorced and a mother of two. Gacy then quit his job as a chef and became a contractor. This was undoubtedly Gacy’s peak, his contracting business would see him gross $200,000 a year (Ellis & Meyer, 1999). Although the majority of Gacy’s employees were teenage boys, he was loved in his neighborhood, throwing frequent dinner parties and barbecues. He also was active in his local community. An active member of the Democratic party and director of Chicago’s annual Polish Constitution Day Parade (Ellis & Meyer, 1999). Unfortunately, the activity that would connect him to his nickname ‘The Killer Clown’ comes from his involvement in the ‘Jolly Joker’ clown club whose members performed at fundraisers as well as entertaining hospitalized children. He named his character ‘Pogo the Clown’ (Ellis & Meyer, 1999). In 1975, Gacy had admitted to his wife that he was gay, divorcing a year later.

Killing Spree

He committed his first murder in 1972. Gacy claimed it was accidental. 15-year-old Timothy McCoy who was headed to Omaha, Nebraska by bus was spotted by Gacy as he was driving by the bus station. Gacy offered the young man a place to stay and promised McCoy he would drive him to the bus station first thing in the morning. McCoy was murdered that next morning, he entered Gacy’s bedroom holding a knife, and Gacy thinking the boy wanted to kill him in his defense stabbed McCoy to death. Gacy later realized that McCoy was preparing breakfast as a thank-you for Gacy’s hospitality and generosity (Keller, 2012) Timothy McCoy would be the first of many to be buried in John Wayne Gacy’s unanimous crawl space under his house. Later admitting it to the courts that ‘I realized death was the ultimate thrill’ (Keller, 2012, 137). Also claimed he experienced an orgasm while stabbing McCoy. The Killer clown would continue the deep dark path after that. Gacy began to attack employees who worked for him. There was a close call with 15-year-old Anthony Antonucci, Gacy handcuffed him, and Antonucci got free and wrestled Gacy to the ground, luckily for him, he was a high school wrestler. Antonucci escaped but continued to be an employee of Gacy’s even after the incident. Most of Gacy’s victims were employees of his luring them in with believable antics by inviting the young men over to talk about pay or other work-related things. Most of his victims would be put to death the same way, raped and then gagged or strangled to keep them quiet. Gacy was raping and slaughtering an average of 2 young men a month (Keller, 2012). Almost all the young men were buried in his crawlspace below his house. As things continued and more employees disappeared, Gacy would use the believable excuse that he would pay them and send them on their way for work-related purposes. (Keller, 2012). One employee 17-year-old Gregory Godzik, went missing in December of 1976 after only being an employee of Gacy’s for 3 weeks. Before being murdered Godzik told his parents that Gacy needed help ‘digging trenches’ for a drain in his crawlspace. Godzik’s parents had contacted Gacy asking for their son’s whereabouts but were told that their son planned on running away from home (Keller, 2012). Strangely enough in 1977, a young Robert Donnelly was abducted at gunpoint, where Gacy took him home, raped, and tortured him. Donnelly begged Gacy to kill him. Gacy attempted to drown him but quickly revived him after Donnelly became unconscious, as he was being shoved headfirst into a bathtub repeatedly (Keller, 2012, 141). Oddly enough Gacy let Donnelly go free and even drove him back to the sight where he was abducted. Donnelly eventually reported the case and Gacy was questioned by police, but Gacy said everything was consensual. The police believed him, and no charges were filed. After burying a near 30 victims in the crawl space of his basement, Gacy was running out of the room. His last 4 victims would be thrown into the Des Plaines River (Keller, 2012).

The Turning Point

Jeffrey Rignall, a 26-year-old male, was lured in by Gacy offering him a joint. Gacy then began his antics in the vehicle, by smothering Rignall with a chloroform-soaked rag, he was then brought back to Gacy’s house, raped, and tortured. Rignall somehow escaped the same night, learning that he eventually had permanent liver damage due to the chloroform (Keller, 2012). Rignall reported it to the police but when failed to do anything Rignall took matters into his hands. Staking out at an exit where he knew Gacy drove through every day. Rignall tailed him all the way home and then informed the police of Gacy’s home at 8213 West Summerdale (Keller, 2012). Gacy was arrested and eventually arrested for the assault on Rignall, but while waiting for his trial he committed his last few murders. John Wayne Gacy was contracted to do a remodeling job at a local pharmacy in 1978, this would be his last act of business. He spotted pharmacy employee Robert Priest. Gacy offered him work and later Piest disappeared. His mother knew of his last whereabouts and was told he was being interviewed by a contractor. His family filed a missing person report with the local police (Keller, 2012). The local police became curious and started checking Gacy’s background and to their surprise, he had an outstanding battery charge back in Chicago (Valente, 2018). The police then searched Gacy’s house, finding class rings, driver’s licenses, handcuffs, and many articles of clothing that were too small for Gacy (Valente, 2018). Police still felt they didn’t have enough evidence to charge him but began surveillance. Gacy was aware of the surveillance and would even joke with the officers following him by inviting them out for meals and drinks on multiple occasions (Keller, 2012). Gacy eventually alluded to the pressure by drinking heavily and being unkept, unshaven, and bleary-eyed (Keller, 2012, 146). Gacy eventually went to his lawyers, trying to file charges against the police to end the surveillance. After being questioned by his lawyers he confessed to Robert Piest’s murder. ‘This boy is dead. He’s in the river.’ (Valente, 2018, 20). After that, Gacy admitted to lawyers that he had killed many people. His lawyers, knowing he was heavily intoxicated made him an appointment immediately with a psychiatrist. Gacy never attended the appointment. On the same day of visiting his lawyers, he then visited a local gas station, handed the attendant a bag of marijuana, and said ‘I killed 30 people, give or take a few. These guys are going to kill me.’ (Valente, 2018, 22). The attendant immediately reported it to the police, and the police went after him as soon as they could, thinking the confession to the gas station attendant would ultimately lead to Gacy committing suicide. The police found Gacy and arrested him for possession of marijuana. Ultimately, the police obtained a search warrant and immediately commented on the smell of decomposition (Keller, 2012). They eventually found bodies and flesh all around the crawl space of the basement. In custody, Gacy admitted to all crimes. Eventually, 29 bodies were recovered in the basement and 4 in the local river (Valente, 2018). 5 weeks after all the bodies were recovered, Gacy went on trial, pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to death on February 6, 1980. He stayed on death row for 14 years before being executed by lethal injection on May 10, 1994 (Valente, 2018).

Textbook

In our first textbook used in class, ‘Sexual Victimization Then and Now’ all of John Wayne Gacy’s crimes can all be described and defined. As per the NCVS, the definition of rape changed thoroughly throughout the years but had a significant meaning for both males on females, male on male, and female on females finally in the mid-1990s. It is defined as ‘penetration, no matter how slight of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim’ (Richards & Marcum, 2015, 11). In Gacy’s crimes, there was never any consent from any of the victims. John’s victims were all underage. Which would classify that in today’s world as statutory rape. Defined as ‘Based on the age of the individuals involved in the sexual act. If at least one of the individuals falls below a state’s determined age of consent, the sexual act is defined as a crime regardless of the intentions of the sexual acts.’ (Richards & Marcum, 2015, 103). Well before the rape and statutory rape, Gacy was known for sexual harassment in the workplace but worked his way around getting or figured out by using his power as a leader to most who worked under him. Sexual harassment in the textbook is defined as ‘behavior must be a sexual, such as sexual coercion to retain employment, spreading rumors about a person’s alleged sexual activities on social media sites, or derogatory remarks and attitudes related to one’s sex. Secondly, the aspect of behavior is that it must be unwanted or unwelcome. In addition, to hold an employer or a school responsible, the victim must demonstrate that such behaviors diminished the victim’s ability to continue his or her employment or education due to the environment due to the organization’s ineffective response to the harassment’ (Richards & Marcum, 2015, 52). Lastly, John intentionally murdered everyone he could in the first degree. First-degree murder is defined as “A calculated act of slaying committed with malice aforethought, often requiring aggravated circumstances such as extreme brutality.” (Murder, 2019). Gacy was known for knocking his victims unconscious, tying them to a chair, raping them, and murdering them.

Conclusion

It seems to all stem back to John’s childhood that made him this way. He was physically and mentally abused by his father. His father was notorious for sexually assaulting his sister, mother, and John and with minimal friends throughout his adolescent years, it set John up on a recipe for disaster. His anti-social self as a minor reminds me of the social control theory. Where family, friends, education, and many more things that related to Johns’s future actions were justifiable in his mind. In the 1960s and 1970s, he was a closet gay which would have no doubt been frowned upon. John bottled up all his feelings until he ultimately exploded, and it turned him into a living monster, and arguably one of the most famous serial killers to ever exist.

Leadership in Early Childhood Education

Leadership in Early Childhood Education

Some of my main goals were based around the inquiry questions I had throughout my Professional Experience. ‘How can parents take more of a leadership role in their children’s learning and development? (working along side the staff),’ ‘How is the OEYC supporting the needs of the families? How does the OEYC contribute to the positive growth and development of all families?’ This gave me a chance to witness parents initiating and conducting some of the activities like Little Chefs, Gathering Time, Dad and Me Activities, cleaning up after themselves, and taking it upon themselves to make other families feel welcome within the program. I began documenting the conversations I was having with the families at the centre, grasping a better understanding of how the OEYC has affected them and their children.

Putting together a Journal of Journeys of the conversations I had with the parents was a way to help support the documentation of the positive outcomes they’ve had at the OEYC and how their children have grown and developed since attending the program. After talking to some of the families and looking at the observations I had made so far, I critically thought of some questions for myself to focus on while speaking to the families which are, ‘How can leadership roles be strengthened at the OEYC?’ ‘How can more positive interactions be formed between staff and families?’ ‘What personal and professional development could staff take part in to support the families becoming leaders?’ and ‘What methods can be used to interact with the families to help support strong, meaningful and positive leadership roles?’

I also left a Community Comment Book for the parents to write down any questions or concerns or ideas for programs and activities they would like to see being implemented at the centre. In order to complete my goals appropriately, I had to consult the College of Early Childhood Educators Standards and Code of Ethics which helped guide me to do ethical research on the centre and the community. In the text of Standard 1: Caring and Nurturing Relationships that Support Learning in the Code of Ethics and Standards document, it states that, “E. Early Childhood Educators establish professional and caring relationships with children and families. They engage both children and their families by being sensitive and respectful of diversity, equity and inclusion. Early Childhood Educators are receptive listeners and offer encouragement and support by responding appropriately to the ideas, concerns and needs of children and families” (Standards of Practice, p. 13).

A personal goal for myself was to learn more about what is happening in regards to the Best Start and Early Years programs. There are many changes happening within the next couple of years based on the curriculum and as an early childhood educator myself, I wanted to do more research to keep myself and other colleagues updated on these changes. Eventually all of our programs will change too. I also looked at Urie Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model of Human Development. He explains that there are five organized subsystems that help support and guide human development. This link will provide you with the opportunity to read more on the systems Bronfenbrenner speaks about. http://www.psy.cmu.edu/~siegler/35bronfebrenner94.pdf

Quality in early childhood is critical to the well being of children. Everyone is a leader and has leadership potential. Through ongoing learning, engagement, networking, mentoring and collaboration, the leadership skills of every early childhood educator and parent can be strengthened. The purpose of a family is to support the growth and development of its members, which gives them a sense of leadership.

Film responses should critically address intersections between the films, readin

Film responses should critically address intersections between the films, readin

Film responses should critically address intersections between the films, readings, and class discussions, undertaking analyses and asking questions where appropriate. Focus on theanalysis and not the summarization. Consider the strengths and weaknesses of the film in portraying these complex issues, as well as its overall impact on you the viewer.  Finally, you should have a strong conclusion. Summarize your analysis and provide concluding remarks on the significance of the film in highlighting the intersectionality associated with children and youth, in terms of issues of class, culture, place, gender, sexuality and privilege.  Reflect on the insights gained from the film and how they contribute to a deeper understanding of these interconnected phenomena.
 
Your review should be 3-4 pages long, Times New Roman font, 12-point, Double-spaced. Include citations and references, if referring to external sources.  It should follow APA formatting guidelines for citations and references.
 
Note: Please ensure to watch the selected film attentively, take notes, and engage critically with the material to produce a comprehensive analysis.