I Appear to Have Completely Missed the Boat.

A few weeks ago I posted here on the findings of some research that appeared to show a link between certain gene fragments in kids, and kids who had been diagnosed with ADHD. This had been broadcast in some sections of the news of new "proof" that ADHD was genetic and not just the end result of lousy parenting and naughty kids getting away with murder. This spurred me to write a piece muling on the hypothetical consequences to our society and notions of morality and deviancy - if it was discovered that genetics was the largest factor in determining a persons behaviour. I thought it would perhaps lead to a greater understanding (though would be very contentious to many people) of both mental disorders, and in the case of something like ADHD, and fringe autists - that it was not just a case of youngsters being difficult for the hell of it, or being "a bit of a weirdo". That or society may realise that people could be victims to a genome that they had no say in coding, and where would we go with that, with our assumption of a largely free will concept of personal behaviour. So I was both surprised and depressed by a post I read on Ben Goldacres peerless Bad Science blog. I've put up the appropriate parts of the posting in the quotes below, and it seems that if we are to believe the research into people who believe that genetic determinism is the major cause of mental issues, that it far from induces a more understanding attitude to those afflicted. It seems that I missed the boat with my previous post, and not just slightly. This stuff is pretty damning.

and Harre explored attitudes among first year undergraduate psychology students, with questionnaires designed to probe belief about the causes of mental health problems, and responses on 6-point scales to statements like “I would be less likely to become romantically involved with someone if I knew they had spent time in a psychiatric hospital”. People who believed more in a biological or genetic cause were more likely to believe that people with mental health problems are unpredictable and dangerous, more likely to fear them, and more likely to avoid interacting with them. An earlier study in 1999 by Read and Law had similar results.

In 2002 Walker and Read showed young adults a video portraying a man with psychotic symptoms, such as hallucinations and delusions, then gave them either biogenetic or psychosocial explanations. Yet again, the “medical model” approach significantly increased perceptions of dangerousness and unpredictability.

In 2004 Dietrich and colleagues conducted a huge series of structured interviews with three representative population samples in Germany, Russia and Mongolia. Endorsing biological factors as the root cause for schizophrenia was associated with a greater desire for social distance.

And lastly, more compelling than any individual study, a review of the literature to date in 2006 found that overall, biogenetic causal theories, and labelling something as an “illness”, are both positively related to perceptions of dangerousness and unpredictability, and to fear and desire for social distance. They identified 19 studies addressing the question. 18 found that belief in a genetic or biological cause was associated with more negative attitudes to people with mental health problems. Just one found the opposite, that belief in a genetic or biological cause was associated with more positive attitudes

That is pretty depressing findings. That people who are prone to a genetic view of human behaviour are more likely to distance themselves from people with mental issues, and worse seem to think that on some level people so afflicted are "prisoners of their genes." or potentially unreformable and lost causes - prisoners of their own DNA, and seen as more dangerous than people who don't subscribe to the genetic view, who may not be as willing to write them off.

Now I want to say that I don't take the view of our hypothetical "genetic" person above, in regards to those who are suffering from disorders such as these, but I think Ben's closing statements should be heeded.

"Blaming parents is clearly vile. But before reading this research I think I also assumed, unthinkingly, like many people, that a “biological cause” story about mental health problems was inherently valuable for combating stigma. Now I’m not so sure. People who want to combat prejudice may need to challenge their own prejudices too."

Seconded.