Welche Bedeutung hat die neurobiologische Forschung für die forensische Psychiatrie?

  • Harald Dreßing
  • Alexander Sartorius
  • Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg
ÜBERSICHT
Received:
Accepted:

Zusammenfassung

Zunehmend werden Studien publiziert, die neurobiologische Befunde bei antisozialem und gewalttätigem Verhalten beschreiben. Eine zentrale Bedeutung haben dabei bildgebende Verfahren, insbesondere Untersuchungen mit der funktionellen Kernspintomographie.

Die vorliegende Arbeit stellt exemplarisch einige neurobiologische Forschungsbefunde bei antisozialem und gewalttätigem Verhalten sowie bei pädophilen Sexualstraftätern vor sowie Studien, die über neurobiologische Risikokonstellationen berichten. Anhand dieser exemplarisch vorgestellten Studien wird die Bedeutung dieser Befunde für einige Fragestellungen in der forensischen Psychiatrie diskutiert.

Es wird dabei die These vertreten, dass eine differenzierte und kritische Anwendung neurobiologischer Untersuchungsmethoden das Verständnis der biologischen Grundlagen delinquenten Verhaltens erweitern kann. Dennoch wird delinquentes Verhalten immer nur als ein komplexes und multifaktorielles Geschehen von biologischen, psychologischen, sozialen und situativen Faktoren zu verstehen sein, für das sich monokausale Erklärungen verbieten. Für eine sinnvolle Integration neurobiologischer Forschungsbefunde in die Theorie und Praxis der forensischen Psychiatrie ist eine interdisziplinäre Diskussion aber unabdingbar. Es muss Anliegen einer modernen Forensischen Psychiatrie sein, Anschluss an die modernen neurobiologischen Forschungsansätze der Allgemeinpsychiatrie zu halten.

Schlüsselwörter

Forensische Psychiatrie neurobiologische Forschung funktionelle Kernspintomographie antisoziale Persönlichkeitsstörung Sexualstraftäter Schuldfähigkeit 

Implications of neurobiological research for forensic psychiatry

Abstract

There is an increasing number of brain imaging studies revealing structural and functional impairments in antisocial and violent individuals and sex offenders. This review outlines some neurobiological findings on offenders with antisocial personality disorder and sex offenders diagnosed with paedophilia. With regard to these studies the implications of neurobiological research for forensic psychiatry are discussed.

The increasing knowledge of functional impairments provides a better understanding of the neurobiological underpinnings of delinquent behaviour. Nevertheless, it has to be kept in mind that antisocial behaviour undoubtedly arises from a complex pattern of biological, psychological, social and situative factors. Optimal integration of neurobiological findings requires cooperation among many disciplines such as medicine, criminology, sociology, psychology, politics and neuroscience.

Key words

forensic psychiatry neuroscience functional imaging antisocial personality disorder sexual offender criminal responsibility 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Lamnek S (2001) Theorien abweichenden Verhaltens. UTB, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Singer W (2003) Ein neues Menschenbild? Suhrkamp, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hare RD (2003) The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. Multi-Health Systems, Toronto, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Finger S (1994) Origins of neuroscience: a history of explorations into brain function. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bassarath L (2001) Neuroimaging studies of antisocial behaviour. Can J Psychiatry 46:728–732PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tonkonogy JM (1991) Violence and temporal lobe lesion: head CT and MRI data. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 3:189–196PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    van Elst LT, Woermann FG, Lemieux L, Thompson PJ, Trimble MR (2000) Affective aggression in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy: a quantitative MRI study of the amygdala. Brain 123 (Pt 2):234–243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harlow J (1848) Passage of an iron bar through the head. Boston Med Surg J 13:389–393Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grafman J, Schwab K, Warden D, Pridgen A, Brown HR, Salazar AM (1996) Frontal lobe injuries, violence, and aggression: a report of the Vietnam Head Injury Study. Neurology 46:1231–1238PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aron AR, Fletcher PC, Bullmore ET, Sahakian BJ, Robbins TW (2003) Stop-signal inhibition disrupted by damage to right inferior frontal gyrus in humans. Nat Neurosci 6:115–116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bechara A, Van Der LM (2005) Decision-making and impulse control after frontal lobe injuries. Curr Opin Neurol 18:734–739PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Koenigs M, Young L, Adolphs R, Tranel D, Cushman F, Hauser M, Damasio A (2007) Damage to the prefrontal cortex increases utilitarian moral judgements. Nature 446:908–911PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Meyers CA, Berman SA, Scheibel RS, Hayman A (1992) Case report: acquired antisocial personality disorder associated with unilateral left orbital frontal lobe damage. J Psychiatry Neurosci 17:121–125PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Blair RJ, Cipolotti L (2000) Impaired social response reversal. A case of ‘acquired sociopathy’. Brain 123 (Pt 6):1122–1141PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Blair RJ (2003) Neurobiological basis of psychopathy. Br J Psychiatry 182:5–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Raine A, Lencz T, Bihrle S, LaCasse L, Colletti P (2000) Reduced prefrontal gray matter volume and reduced autonomic activity in antisocial personality disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 57:119–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Volkow ND, Tancredi L (1987) Neural substrates of violent behaviour. A preliminary study with positron emission tomography. Br J Psychiatry 151:668–673PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Raine A, Buchsbaum MS, Stanley J, Lottenberg S, Abel L, Stoddard J (1994) Selective reductions in prefrontal glucose metabolism in murderers. Biol Psychiatry 36:365–373PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Birbaumer N, Veit R, Lotze M, Erb M, Hermann C, Grodd W, Flor H (2005) Deficient fear conditioning in psychopathy: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Arch Gen Psychiatry 62:799–805PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gordon HL, Baird AA, End A (2004) Functional differences among those high and low on a trait measure of psychopathy. Biol Psychiatry 56:516–521PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Blair RJ (2001) Neurocognitive models of aggression, the antisocial personality disorders, and psychopathy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 71:727–731PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Maes M, De VN, Van HF, Van WD, Westenberg H, Cosyns P, Neels H (2001) Pedophilia is accompanied by increased plasma concentrations of catecholamines, in particular epinephrine. Psychiatry Res 103:43–49PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mendez MF, Chow T, Ringman J, Twitchell G, Hinkin CH (2000) Pedophilia and temporal lobe disturbances. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 12:71–76PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Burns JM, Swerdlow RH (2003) Right orbitofrontal tumor with pedophilia symptom and constructional apraxia sign. Arch Neurol 60:437–440PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Flor-Henry P, Lang RA, Koles ZJ, Frenzel RR (1991) Quantitative EEG studies of pedophilia. Int J Psychophysiol 10:253–258PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dressing H, Obergriesser T, Tost H, Kaumeier S, Ruf M, Braus DF (2001) Homosexual pedophilia and functional networks – An fMRI case report and literature review. Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr 69:539–544PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tost H, Vollmert C, Brassen S, Schmitt A, Dressing H, Braus DF (2004) Pedophilia: neuropsychological evidence encouraging a brain network perspective. Med Hypotheses 63:528–531PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dressing H (2004) Neurobiologische Befunde zur Pädophilie. Nervenarzt 75:264: 75, Suppl. 2, 264Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sartorius A, Ruf M, Kief C, Demirakca T, Bailer J, Ende G, Henn FA, Meyer-Lindenberg A, Dressing H (2007) Abnormal amygdala activation profile in pedophila. submittedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schiffer B, Peschel T, Paul T, Gizewski E, Forsting M, Leygraf N, Schedlowski M, Krueger TH (2007) Structural brain abnormalities in the frontostriatal system and cerebellum in pedophilia. J Psychiatr Res 41:753–762PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kozel FA, Johnson KA, Mu Q, Grenesko EL, Laken SJ, George MS (2005) Detecting deception using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Biol Psychiatry 58:605–613PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Farwell LA, Smith SS (2001) Using brain MERMER testing to detect knowledge despite efforts to conceal. J Forensic Sci 46:135–143PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Haxby JV, Gobbini MI, Furey ML, Ishai A, Schouten JL, Pietrini P (2001) Distributed and overlapping representations of faces and objects in ventral temporal cortex. Science 293:425–2430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Caspi A, McClay J, Moffitt TE, Mill J, Martin J, Craig IW, Taylor A, Poulton R (2002) Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children. Science 297:851–854PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Meyer-Lindenberg A, Buckholtz JW, Kolachana B, Hariri R, Pezawas L, Blasi G, Wabnitz A, Honea R, Verchinski B, Callicott JH, Egan M, Mattay V, Weinberger DR (2006) Neural mechanisms of genetic risk for impulsivity and violence in humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103:6269–6274PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mobbs D, Lau HC, Jones OD, Frith CD (2007) Law, Responsibility, and the Brain. PLoS Biol 5:e103PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Illes J, Kirschen MP, Gabrieli JD (2003) From neuroimaging to neuroethics. Nat Neurosci 6:205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Racine E, Bar-Ilan O, Illes J (2005) fMRI in the public eye. Nat Rev Neurosci 6:159–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dressing H, Salize HJ, Gordon H (2007) Legal frameworks and key concepts regulating diversion and treatment of mentally disordered offenders in European Union member states. Eur Psychiatry 2007 Epub ahead of printGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Dressing H, Salize HJ (2006) Forensic psychiatric assessment in European Union member states. Acta Psychiatr Scand 114:282–289PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kroeber HL (2007) The historical debate on brain and legal responsibility–revisited. Behav Sci Law 25:251–261PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Linden DE (2006) How psychotherapy changes the brain–the contribution of functional neuroimaging. Mol Psychiatry 11:528–538PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Seminowicz DA, Mayberg HS, McIntosh AR, Goldapple K, Kennedy S, Segal Z, Rafi-Tari S (2004) Limbic-frontal circuitry in major depression: a path modeling metanalysis. Neuroimage 22:409–418PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Heide KM, Solomon EP (2006) Biology, childhood trauma, and murder: re-thinking justice. Int J Law Psychiatry 29:220–233PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sass H (2003) Persönlichkeit, Persönlichkeitsstörung und Verantwortung: forensisch-psychiatrische und anthropologische Aspekte. In: Herpertz SC, Sass H (Hrsg) Persönlichkeitsstörungen. Thieme, Stuttgart, New York, S 177–182Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Feigenson N (2006) Brain imaging and courtroom evidence: on the admissibility and persuasiveness of fMRI. Int J Law in Context 2(3):233–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Eastman N, Campbell C (2006) Neuroscience and legal determination of criminal responsibility. Nat Rev Neurosci 7:311–318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gazzangia MS (2005) The ethical brain. Dana Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Harris GT, Rice ME, Quinsey VL (1993) Violent recidivism of mentally disordered offenders: the development of a statistical prediction instrument. Criminal Justice and Behavior 20:315–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Webster CD, Eaves D (1995) The HCR-20 Scheme: The Assessment of Dangerousness and risk. Simon Fraser University and Forensic Psychiatric Services Commission of British Columbia, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Cooke DJ, Michie C (2001) Refining the construct of psychopathy: towards a hierarchical model. Psychol Assess 13:171–188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Steinkopff-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harald Dreßing
    • 1
  • Alexander Sartorius
    • 1
  • Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Zentralinstitut für seelische GesundheitMannheimDeutschland

Personalised recommendations