Can Crime Be Genetic? (cont)

By Stefanie Jones

Say that genetically profiling criminals becomes a legitimate way of excusing them from their actions, where does this leave the countless other people who share similar genes but commit no crime?

It would make sense that if this theory were to be true, there are many people out there who have a predisposition to rape and pillage and yet do not act on it – should we monitor these people to ensure that they don’t commit an offence?
I’d think that this would go against human rights laws, but if people are to be excused on the basis of their genes, then surely we must take measures to prevent anyone with similar genes from committing a crime.

Then there are the people who potentially have the ‘criminal gene’, but don’t break the law, so for those that do, there must be some sort of conscious decision involved, and that implies using their free will rather than an unfortunate consequence of their genetic make-up.

If we start to view murder as something that some of us are predisposed to do, then what about rape? We are all predisposed to reproduce sexually, so should we let rapists go on the grounds that they are simply trying to propagate their genes, as nature intended? The use of a genetic defence in court would suggest yes. Which is of course, utter rubbish.

So what makes individuals who commit crimes different from others that share their genes? The answer can only be nurture. That is to say, the environment you are brought up in, including your family background, socio-economic status, and social groups has a heavy influence on your behaviour in all circumstances, including your education, relationships and, quite probably, your likelihood of committing a crime.

Your decision on how to act in certain situations will also be influenced by your environment, which is why a violent youth culture is often attributed to young people ‘falling in with the wrong crowd’.

Basically, the gene defence is probably more than a little inaccurate. Though of course I can see the appeal of effectively being able to blame your parents for your wrongdoings, I can’t help but think that this new generation of DNA testing might not end up being put to worthy use. Nita Farahany, an expert on genetics and law, put it best in her comments on the Post’s article, “Just because you can explain a behaviour’s cause doesn’t mean it is excusable”

Stefanie is a psychologist at the University of St Andrews

<- BACK TO PREVIOUS PAGE

More stories from the Null