When it is the good boys who kill. Psychopathology or social pathology?

Abstract

Cruel homicides, apparently incomprehensible, committed by good boys. Are we indeed in presence of a worrisome increase of the number of serious crimes from young people or draft only of a fed collective perception from the extraordinary media interest towards some of these episodes? Is something changing, on the qualitative
plan, in the motivation to kill and in such case is it a legacy to psychopathology factors that characterizes them or the infuence of changes insocial structure?
From these questions the authors have begun their discussion. The analysis of judicial statistics concurs to say that the trends in homicides and of attempted homicides from minors does not appear to have increased in any meaningful way in the last the ten years, leaving only the emergence of an important increment in
foreign residents in Italy. In the greater part of the cases the crimes of minors seem to more often become part of a social cultural context characterised by the involvement in delinquent activities with adults, legacies to common crime, that touches
minors who are quickly left out of academic circuit. 20% of crimes moreover exist caused by so-called non problematic boys. For understanding the motivation to commit a crime by these boys an analysis that, with individiual factors included, it holds account of the family context but also of the cultural and social
changes that cross our society, as these can influence the phenomonal expressivity in behaviour patterns.
The discussions started from a deeper study of the concept of teenage crisis also in order to comprise the reactoins of the parents, in measures of how they work and how they are adaptive.The attention has been centralized on the excessive
protective attitude of the parents, animated from the attempt to preserve the child from suffering and uneasiness.This protection extends however to the point of to not concur adequate elaborations of the painful experiences, even smallest,
thus contributing to crystallize the typical teenage passages of egocentricism and omnipotence that then lead to ambitious expectations in the ability to manage frustration.
It is thought that all it can favor is the extension of the teenage phase giving a contribution to the more and more frequent phenomenon of `young adults', with little or nothing to defer desire and impulsivity, to resist frustration, to delay needs, to try empathy feelings for the other, to model both a psychopathological
and social inducement that, in determining moments in life contexts can lead to the destruction of the obstacle of frustration, even if said obstacle is a person or even a parent.