The genetics of crime becoming clearer

If it's all due to "poverty", how come most poor people are not criminals?

Why do some people from deprived or abusive backgrounds become violent criminals, while others, whose upbringing appears to have been equally disadvantageous, go on to lead productive, law-abiding lives? Might there be ways to spot high-risk individuals before they commit serious offences, perhaps even in childhood? ...

Even those most wedded to a sociological model of offending accept that a relatively small proportion of those convicted of criminal offences account for a very large proportion of total crime. David Farrington's study of every male born in Britain in 1956 found that as many as one third had been convicted of at least one non-traffic offence by the age of 30. But he and his colleagues also discovered that as few as 5 per cent were responsible for at least half of all known crime committed by the 1956 cohort. Other research suggests a group this small commits more than 70 per cent of all recorded offences, and more than 70 per cent of violent ones...

Moffitt cited several studies to propose that there is "a very small group of males who display high rates of antisocial behaviour across time." The same 5 per cent of boys first appear on the criminological radar screen in early childhood-being prone to aggression and violence, disobedience, recklessness, lying and theft. Even at primary school, they are likely to face exclusion and other sanctions. In adolescence, they are the youths who commit the more serious and violent crimes, and in adulthood they do not, like most of their peers, cease such behaviour.... The causes of "life-course persistent antisocial behaviour" are, wrote Moffitt, likely to lie "early in life, in factors that are present before or soon after birth." ...

In childhood, between the ages of three and 13, the Dunedin boys with the worst conduct problems at home and school also displayed "neurological abnormalities, low intellectual ability, reading difficulties, hyperactivity, poor scores on neuropsychological tests, and slow heart rate." ... In Dunedin, the 10 per cent of boys whose antisocial behaviour had started before adolescence were about three times as likely as the "adolescence- limited" group to be convicted of crimes after the age of 26, and they "tended to specialise in serious offences." ... Not only were they committing much more crime, their lives were in much worse shape in other ways. At 26, they were much more likely than the "adolescence-limited" group to be abusing alcohol, and to have suffered symptoms of schizophrenia, paranoia and depression. They were more likely to have abused their partners, and while they had fathered more children, they were less likely to be helping to rear their offspring. More than half had no high-school qualifications, and only one of them had attended college....

Studies of twins and adopted children had already established that antisocial behaviour is likely to be partly inherited. Identical twin pairs, who share the same genes, have been shown to be more likely to share antisocial traits than fraternal, non-identical ones. The children of criminals, even when adopted at an early age by non-abusive and non-criminal families, are more likely than average to become offenders themselves....

More here

(For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and DISSECTING LEFTISM. My Home Page. Email me (John Ray) here.)