Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cosmetic Psychopharmacology for Prisoners: Reducing Crime and Recidivism Through Cognitive Intervention

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Neuroethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Criminologists have long acknowledged the link between a number of cognitive deficits, including low intelligence and impulsivity, and crime. A new wave of research has demonstrated that pharmacological intervention can restore or improve cognitive function, particularly executive function (including the inhibition of impulsive response), and restore neural plasticity. Such restoration and improvement can allow for easier acquisition of new skills and as a result, presents significant possibilities for the criminal justice system. For example, studies have shown that supplements of Omega-3, a fatty acid commonly found in food such as tuna, can decrease frequency of violent incidents in an incarcerated population. Research has also begun to explore the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) to reduce impulsivity in some violent offenders. However, there are significant legal and ethical implications when moving from dietary supplements to prescription pharmaceuticals and medical devices for cognitive intervention. This paper will explore the legal and ethical issues surrounding the use of pharmacological intervention on prisoners as an effort to reduce crime and recidivism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ogilvie, James M., Anna L. Stewart, Raymond CK Chan, and David HK Shum. 2011. Neuropsychological measures of executive function and antisocial behavior: a meta-analysis. Criminology 49: 1063–1107.

  2. Bergeron Tracy K., and Paul M. Valliant. 2001. Executive function and personality in adolescent and adult offenders vs. non-offenders. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation 33: 27–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. National Research Council (US). 2007 Committee on Community Supervision and Desistance from Crime. Parole, desistance from crime, and community integration. National Academies Press.

  4. Motiuk, Laurence L. and Shelley L. Brown. 1993 Survival time until suspension for sex offenders on conditional release. (research report no. R-31). Ottawa, Canada: Correctional Service of Canada.

  5. Rocque Michael, Brandon C. Welsh, and Adrian Raine. 2012. Biosocial criminology and modern crime prevention. Journal of Criminal Justice 40: 306–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. DeLisi Matt, and Michael G. Vaughn. 2011. The importance of neuropsychological deficits relating to self-control and temperament to the prevention of serious antisocial behavior. International Journal of Child, Youth and Family Studies 2: 12–35.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cullen Francis T. 2013. Rehabilitation: beyond nothing works. Crime and Justice 42: 299–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Andrews Donald A., and James Bonta. 2010. Rehabilitating criminal justice policy and practice. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 16: 39–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cullen Francis, and Cheryl Lero Jonson. 2010. Rehabilitation and treatment programs. In Crime and public policy, eds. James Q. Wilson, and Joan Petersilia, 293–344. New York: Oxford University Press.

  10. Ward Tony, Joseph Melser, and Pamela M. Yates. 2007. Reconstructing the risk–need–responsivity model: a theoretical elaboration and evaluation. Aggression and Violent Behavior 12: 208–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bonta James, and Donald A. Andrews. 2007. Risk-need-responsivity model for offender assessment and rehabilitation. Rehabilitation 6: 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Travers Rosie, Ruth E. Mann, and Clive R. Hollin. 2014. Who benefits from cognitive skills programs? Differential impact by risk and offense type. Criminal Justice and Behavior 41: 1103–1129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Landenberger Nana A., and Mark W. Lipsey. 2005. The positive effects of cognitive–behavioral programs for offenders: a meta-analysis of factors associated with effective treatment. Journal of Experimental Criminology 1: 451–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sperber Kimberly Gentry, Edward J. Latessa, and Matthew D. Makarios. 2013. Examining the interaction between level of risk and dosage of treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior 40(3): 338–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Illescas Santiago Redondo, Julio Sánchez-Meca, and Vicente Garrido Genovés. 2001. Treatment of offenders and recidivism: assessment of the effectiveness of programmes applied in Europe. Psychology in Spain 5: 47–62.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Pearson Frank S., Douglas S. Lipton, Charles M. Cleland, and Dorline S. Yee. 2002. The effects of behavioral/cognitive-behavioral programs on recidivism. Crime & Delinquency 48: 476–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wilson David B., Leana Allen Bouffard, and Doris L. Mackenzie. 2005. A quantitative review of structured, group-oriented, cognitive-behavioral programs for offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior 32: 172–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Grady Melissa D., Daniel Edwards, and Carrie Pettus-Davis. 2015. A longitudinal outcome evaluation of a prison-based sex offender treatment program. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment. doi:10.1177/1079063215585731.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dolan M. 2009. Recent advances in therapy for sexual offenders. F1000 Medicine Reports 1: 45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Needham Marie, Michaela Gummerum, Rebecca Mandeville Norden, Janine Rakestrow Dickens, Avril Mewse, Andrew Barnes, and Yaniv Hanoch. 2015. Association between three different cognitive behavioral alcohol treatment programs and recidivism rates among male offenders: findings from the United Kingdom. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research. doi:10.1111/acer.12738.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Greely Henry T. 2008. Neuroscience and criminal justice: not responsibility but treatment. University of Kansas Law Review 56: 1103–1138.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Maletzky Barry M., Arthur Tolan, and Bentson McFarland. 2006. The Oregon depo-provera prograxm: a five-year follow-up. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment 18: 303–316.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rice Marnie E., and Grant T. Harris. 2011. Is androgen deprivation therapy effective in the treatment of sex offenders?. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 17: 315–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Volkow Nora D., Thomas R. Frieden, Pamela S. Hyde, and Stephen S. Cha. 2014. Medication-assisted therapies—tackling the opioid-overdose epidemic. New England Journal of Medicine 370: 2063–2066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Matusow Harlan, Samuel L. Dickman, Josiah D. Rich, Chunki Fong, Dora M. Dumont, Carolyn Hardin, Douglas Marlowe, and Andrew Rosenblum. 2013. Medication assisted treatment in US drug courts: results from a nationwide survey of availability, barriers and attitudes.". Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 44: 473–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Schoenthaler Stephen, Stephen Amos, Walter Doraz, Mary-Ann Kelly, George Muedeking, and James Wakefield Jr. 1997. The effect of randomized vitamin-mineral supplementation on violent and non-violent antisocial behavior among incarcerated juveniles. Journal of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine 7: 343–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Schoenthaler Stephen J., and Ian D. Bier. 2000. The effect of vitamin-mineral supplementation on juvenile delinquincy among American schoolchildren: a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine 6: 7–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gesch C. Bernard, Sean M. Hammond, Sarah E. Hampson, Anita Eves, and Martin J. Crowder. 2002. Influence of supplementary vitamins, minerals and essential fatty acids on the antisocial behaviour of young adult prisoners. Randomised, placebo-controlled trial. The British Journal of Psychiatry 181: 22–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Zaalberg Ap, Henk Nijman, Erik Bulten, Luwe Stroosma, and Cees van der Staak. 2010. Effects of nutritional supplements on aggression, rule-breaking, and psychopathology among young adult prisoners. Aggressive Behavior 36: 117–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hamazaki Tomohito, Shigeki Sawazaki, Miho Itomura, Etsuko Asaoka, Yoko Nagao, Nozomi Nishimura, Kazunaga Yazawa, Toyomi Kuwamori, and Masashi Kobayashi. 1996. The effect of docosahexaenoic acid on aggression in young adults A Placebo-controlled Double-Blind Study. Journal of Clinical Investigation 97: 1129–1133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Iribarren, C, JH Markovitz, DR Jacobs, PJ Schreiner, M Daviglus, and JR Hibbeln, J. R. 2004. Dietary intake of n-3, n-6 fatty acids and fish: relationship with hostility in young adults—the CARDIA study. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 58: 24–31.

  32. Butler Tony, Peter W. Schofield, David Greenberg, Stephen H. Allnutt, Devon Indig, Vaughan Carr, Catherine D’Este, Philip B. Mitchell, Knight Lee, and Andrew Ellis. 2010. Reducing impulsivity in repeat violent offenders: an open label trial of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 44: 1137–1143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kayser Andrew S., Daicia C. Allen, Ana Navarro-Cebrian, Jennifer M. Mitchell, and Howard L. Fields. 2012. Dopamine, corticostriatal connectivity, and intertemporal choice. The Journal of Neuroscience 32: 9402–9409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Gervain, Judit, Bradley W. Vines, Lawrence M. Chen, Rubo J. Seo, Takao K. Hensch, Janet F. Werker, and Allan H. Young. 2013. Valproate reopens critical-period learning of absolute pitch. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience 7: 102.

  35. Yang Yaling, Adrian Raine, Todd Lencz, Susan Bihrle, Lori LaCasse, and Patrick Colletti. 2005. Volume reduction in prefrontal gray matter in unsuccessful criminal psychopaths. Biological Psychiatry 57: 1103–1108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Raine Adrian, and Yaling Yang. 2006. Neural foundations to moral reasoning and antisocial behavior. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 1: 203–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Raine Adrian, Yaling Yang, Katherine L. Narr, and Arthur W. Toga. 2011. Sex differences in orbitofrontal gray as a partial explanation for sex differences in antisocial personality. Molecular Psychiatry 16: 227–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Jiménez-Ponce Fiacro, Julián Eduardo Soto-Abraham, Ylián Ramírez-Tapia, Velasco-Campos Francisco, J.D. Carrillo-Ruiz, and P. Gomez-Zenteno. 2011. Evaluation of bilateral cingulotomy and anterior capsulotomy for the treatment of aggressive behavior. Cirugia y Cirujanos 79: 107–113.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Conrad Peter, and Valerie Leiter. 2004. Medicalization, markets, and consumers. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 45: S158–S176.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Stinneford John F. 2006. Incapacitation through maiming: chemical castration, the eighth amendment, and the denial of human dignity. University of Saint Thomas Law Journal 3: 559–599.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Simon J. 2007. Governing through crime: How the war on crime transformed American democracy and created a culture of fear. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Cal. Penal Code § 645.

  43. Beckman Linda. 1998. Chemical castration: constitutional issues of due process, equal protection, and cruel and unusual punishment. West Virginia Law Review 100: 853–896.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Lombardo Raymond A. 1997. California's unconstitutional punishment for heinous crimes: chemical castration of sexual offenders. Fordham Law Review 65: 2611–2646.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Spalding Larry Helm. 1998. Florida's 1997 chemical castration law: a return to the dark ages. Florida State University Law Review 25: 117–129.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962).

  47. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976).

  48. Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210 (1990).

  49. Skeem Jennifer L., and John Monahan. 2011. Current directions in violence risk assessment. Current Directions in Psychological Science 20: 38–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Scurich Nicholas, John Monahan, and Richard S. John. 2012. Innumeracy and unpacking: bridging the nomothetic/idiographic divide in violence risk assessment. Law and Human Behavior 36: 548–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Yang Min, Stephen CP Wong, and Jeremy Coid. 2010. The efficacy of violence prediction: A meta-analytic comparison of nine risk assessment tools. Psychological Bulletin 136(5): 740–767.

  52. Hart Stephen D., Christine Michie, and David J. Cooke. 2007. Precision of actuarial risk assessment instruments. The British Journal of Psychiatry 190: s60–s65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Grove William M., and Paul E. Meehl. 1996. Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: the clinical–statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 2: 293–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Janus Eric S., and Paul E. Meehl. 1997. Assessing the legal standard for predictions of dangerousness in sex offender commitment proceedings. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 3: 33–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Janus Eric S., and Robert A. Prentky. 2003. Forensic use of actuarial risk assessment with sex offenders: accuracy, admissibility and accountability. American Criminal Law Review 40: 1443–1499.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Underwood Barbara D. 1979. Law and the crystal ball: predicting behavior with statistical inference and individualized judgment. Yale Law Journal 88: 1408–1448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Slobogin, Christopher. 2007. Proving the unprovable: The role of Law, science, and speculation in adjudicating culpability and dangerousness: The role of Law, science, and speculation in adjudicating culpability and dangerousness. Oxford University Press.

  58. Buckholtz Joshua W., and Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg. 2013. MAOA and the bioprediction of antisocial behavior: science fact and science fiction. Bioprediction, Biomarkers, and Bad Behavior: Scientific, Legal, and Ethical Challenges 131.

  59. Faigman David L., John Monahan, and Christopher Slobogin. 2014. Group to individual (G2i) inference in scientific expert testimony. The University of Chicago Law Review 81: 417–480.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Ferris Christyne E. 2008. The search for due process in civil commitment hearings: how procedural realities have altered substantive standards. Vanderbilt Law Review 61: 959.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Riggins v. Nevada, 504 U.S. 127 (1992).

  62. Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166 (2003).

  63. Singleton v. Norris, 319 F.3d 1018 (2003).

  64. Beauchamp Tom L., and James F. Childress. 2009. Principles of biomedical ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1395dd (2014).

  66. Paris Joseph E. 2008. Why prisoners deserve health care. Virtual Mentor 10: 113–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Federal Bureau of Prisons Time Computation. http://www.fd.org/docs/select-topics-bop/fed_bop_merchant.pdf. Accessed 5 May 2015.

  68. U.S. Department of Justice, Program Statement. http://www.bop.gov/policy/progstat/5884_002.pdf. Accessed 5 May 2015.

  69. Food and Drug Administration. 2014. Payment to Research subjects Information Sheet, Guidance for Institutional Review Boards and Clinical Investigators. http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm126429.htm. Accessed 5 May 2015.

  70. a C.F.R. § 46.305(a)(2) (2015).

  71. a C.F.R. § 46.305(a)(6) (2015).

  72. Bomann-Larsen Lene. 2013. Voluntary rehabilitation? On neurotechnological behavioral treatment, valid consent and (in)appropriate offers. Neuroethics 6: 65–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Gray matters: integrative approaches at the intersection of neuroscience, ethics, and society. Washington, DC: Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, 2014.

  74. Kaplan Thomas. 2014. Cuomo drops plan to use state money to pay for college classes for inmates. New York Times.

  75. Scheunemann Leslie P., and Douglas B. White. 2011. The ethics and reality of rationing in medicine. CHEST Journal 140: 1625–1632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Goode Erica. 2014. Little-known health act fact: prison inmates are signing up. The New York Times A1.

  77. Western, Bruce and Becky Pettit. Incarceration & social inequality. Daedalus 139: 8–19.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Texas Christian University, 2855 Main Drive, Scharbauer Hall, Suite 4200, Fort Worth, TX, 76129, USA

    Adam B. Shniderman

  2. University of Florida College of Medicine, 1600 SW Archer Rd, Suite N1-07, PO Box 100237, Gainesville, FL, 32610, USA

    Lauren B. Solberg

Authors
  1. Adam B. Shniderman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lauren B. Solberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam B. Shniderman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shniderman, A.B., Solberg, L.B. Cosmetic Psychopharmacology for Prisoners: Reducing Crime and Recidivism Through Cognitive Intervention. Neuroethics 8, 315–326 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-015-9242-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-015-9242-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation