Danny von Albade
1-31-16
Current Event 12
Augenstein, Seth. "The Rise of the Neurobiological Defense with Nita Farahany." Forensic Magazine. Forensic Magazine, 29 Jan. 2016. Web. 31 Jan. 2016.
The insanity or “mental infirmity” plea is not a new creation, but since 2005 there has been a massive spike in mental illness pleas in criminal trials. As neuroscience continues to progress, more and more cases are discovered to involve serious head trauma, addictions, and developmental disabilities. While not all of these cases are genuine, the progress that has been reached on our understanding of the brain has helped to better understand criminal motivations and rehabilitation. One such example given was in regards to the serial killer Brian Dugan of Illinois. After being convicted of three murders and seven rapes, Dugan was sent to death row where he remained until the death penalty was banned in Illinois. Dugan said that he felt remorse for his actions but did not believe that he could control his psychotic impulses outside of prison. This determined that he was in fact mentally ill in need of treatment. This trend of increased mental infirmity cases is believed to continue and it represents progress in criminal trials.
There are many forms of violent crime that do often result from being mentally disturbed. The progress of neuroscience is helping to better elucidate criminal motivations. It calls into question how many people have been killed on death row that were severely disturbed. It’s a step in the right direction toward providing care to the mentally ill which is a tremendous problem in our society today.
This was a very interesting article to read. It had some minor formatting errors, and it also could have included a bit more information on the Duke University study findings. It seems obvious that serial violent criminals have something wrong with them mentally in many cases. No sound minded person would intentionally harm anyone let alone many people. The article did do a good job of citing its evidence and providing solid backup to support its points. I enjoyed reading the article overall.
7 comments:
Danny was able to review a very current topic in his most recent current event. Danny not only talked about the trending topic of “mental infirmity” in a non confrontal way but also with care and effort. Danny did a great job of introducing the topic of the recent trend of pleading insanity in the last couple of years by backing it up with information from neuroscientists. Danny also did a key job in using a specific example to help readers visualize and understand the idea of the topic. Danny’s last paragraph was organized very well and had well thought out opinions that were very genuine.
Danny’s review was very well thought out and my advice may not have to do with his review specifically but maybe more towards the article itself. I think that in this critique/review there should be a contrasting opinion on such an important topic. It is such a strongly debated issue and it really isn’t fair to be one sided. My other piece of advice would be to add more of your own opinion in the last paragraph, because we want to hear your voice! Part of a review is hearing your own opinion.
I was very impressed by this topic and the discussion it brought in Danny’s review. It is interesting that scientists are starting to see mental illnesses as disabilities.
Danny did a great job reviewing the article “The Rise of the Neurobiological Defense with Nita Farahany”. He explained the mental infirmity plea in great detail and provided a specific example which helps the reader to truly understand the topic at hand. He was able to inform the reader about amazing progress in the neuroscience world as well as the progress in criminal trials. His opening was great, by reminding the reader this idea of “mental infirmity” pleas are not new but still very pressing. His topic choice was also attention grabbing due to its relevance in society today.
While he explained the subject of the article in great depth, he could have summarized a little less. By summarizing a little less there is more attention for specifics which will stick better with the reader. It also would have been nice to hear about Danny's opinion on the matter, and how he thinks narrowing in on the insanity cases will help forensic science today.
Overall, Danny's choice of topic was different and very interesting. The insanity plea is coming into play often and making many question the past. His topic is very crucial to today's world.
http://www.forensicmag.com/articles/2016/01/rise-neurobiological-defense-nita-farahany
Augenstein, Seth. "The Rise of the Neurobiological Defense with Nita Farahany." Forensic Magazine. Forensic Magazine, 29 Jan. 2016. Web. 31 Jan. 2016.
http://www.forensicmag.com/articles/2016/01/rise-neurobiological-defense-nita-farahany Augenstein, Seth. "The Rise of the Neurobiological Defense with Nita Farahany." Forensic Magazine. Forensic Magazine, 29 Jan. 2016. Web. 31 Jan. 2016.
I thought that Danny was able to review this topic concisely and accurately. He included a sufficient amount of information about the topic without the review seeming like a copy and paste project. I thought that He included his own opinions in a way that the review seemed like it should, a review. I thought that this review could have been better if Danny had decided to include just a little bit more excerpts from the article. I also thought that this review could have been better if Danny had decided to make it just a little bit longer. Overall I was very impressed with the review and was interested to learn that scientists are beginning to see mental illnesses as disabilities.
Danny’s review overall was very thorough and depicted the important pieces of his article very well. One of the specific things that I thought that Danny did very well consisted of introducing the subject. It was a very smooth introduction and I was immediately intrigued to read more. Another thing that I thought Danny did well was providing a sufficient amount of facts and evidence about the topic, and not an overwhelming amount. Finally, I thought that Danny did a great job at stressing the importance of the issue of the article. That is the most important part of these reviews and Danny did a great job at that part.
While he did many things well some of the things he could have improved on include lengthening it out a little bit more. He also could have cited some information directly from the article a little bit more.
One thing that I learned from the article and Danny’s review is how scientists are really starting to view mental illnesses differently, as diseases.
Works Cited
http://www.forensicmag.com/articles/2016/01/rise-neurobiological-defense-nita-farahany Augenstein, Seth. "The Rise of the Neurobiological Defense with Nita Farahany." Forensic Magazine. Forensic Magazine, 29 Jan. 2016. Web. 31 Jan. 2016.
I really enjoyed the relevance of your topic. I believe you did a great job of properly summarizing the effect that “mental infirmity" pleadings can have in a courtroom or in the world of the law. I think you also did a great job backing up that information. I think the review would have been even stronger if even more opinions of experts were brought in. Specifically opinions from opposing sides and opposing opinions on the issue. That could have lead to a little more personal conclusion from you where we hear how you feel about the issue. Overall, I loved the topic, and thought it was so relevant to society and our classroom today, thanks for sharing it with us!
Danny did a very good job of reviewing his current event article. What I enjoyed the most about Danny’s review is that he gave some background to the topic’s relevance in the past few years. Before he goes into giving a specific example of a case, he gives his audience a solid base of background information on “mental infirmity.” I like that Danny took a broad idea and issue, and then narrowed it down by discussing Brian Dugan’s case. This helped us readers have a better understanding of the issue. I also think Danny did a good job of analyzing what this means to our society as a whole and how it impacts all of us. It is clear that Danny read the article with the intention of making this issue relevant to the lives of all his readers.
Although Danny did a good job reviewing the article, I would suggest that next time he sticks more closely to the text instead of making generalizations. Details such as statistics and quotes from experts would have made his review better. I also think that Danny could have elaborated a bit more on the specific case of Brian Dugan.
This was a really interesting current event to read about because I am especially interested in psychotherapy issues, etc. I think it is important that scientists recognize mental illnesses are disabilities and that they take steps to ensuring that these people are properly treated.
http://www.forensicmag.com/articles/2016/01/rise-neurobiological-defense-nita-farahany
Augenstein, Seth. "The Rise of the Neurobiological Defense with Nita Farahany." Forensic Magazine.
Forensic Magazine, 29 Jan. 2016. Web. 31 Jan. 2016.
Danny von Albade has written a particularly interesting current event review. While his writing is succinct, von Albade’s writing leaves nothing to be desired. For instance, he carefully transitions from a general topic to grab the reader’s attention and familiarize him or her with his topic’s context. This is exemplified in his transition from his hook to his excerpt about Dugan. The current event review is, for certain, representative of the article and it is clear he had read it thoroughly because aside from quotes, he hits all the main ideas in the same sequence that the current event had presented them. Last but not least, the current event writer is very precise with his writing and immediately points to areas of significance and calling to attention the main issue.
However, von Albade still has some way to go before he can perfect his writing. For instance, his summary paragraph is larger than his critique and significance paragraphs combined. Although this is not necessarily a bad thing or always so, it shows that a little bit of more insight could be put into the other paragraphs. In order to remedy this, Danny should try asking himself how and why. How did he come to these conclusions and why? It is important to solidify the relevancy of his points by establishing answers to these very fundamental questions so good luck to him in his further endeavors. Secondly, in his summary paragraph, von Albade could have certain used plenty more quotes from the many experts peppered into the article. Despite von Albade having evidently read the article, it is probably better if he could give some kudos to the experts who have provided this crucial information.
Nonetheless, Danny von Albade has written something outstanding and reviewing him has provided a nice transition back into the groove of writing current events after several hectic weeks. His thoughtful and considerate disposition regarding the topic shows that even forensics topics do not have to be discussed sterilely and instead can be reviewed with compassion.
Post a Comment