This is something much needed, especially for the general public. I still feel as though many people have a rather baseline understanding of mental illness, and better educating these people might make for a better world for people suffering from these illnesses.

I agree entirely. A better understanding of what things influence the decision of a jury is needed to ensure that justice can be effectively served in court, rather than letting the prejudice of a jury decide someone's innocence or guilt.

This seems to be the most likely answer. People felt that those suffering from mental illness had less ability to control their thoughts and actions, so were less guilty. Ironically, this is another form of stigmatization, just one that resulted in a different verdict than expected.

I'd love to know the actual reasons for this. As I said I'm very surprised at this outcome and am interested in how it came about.

Honestly I was surprised by this outcome. I totally expected there to be some obvious stigmatization against the defendant, but surprisingly there wasn't.

This feels pretty obvious. Of course people exposed to a certain idea as though it's true for a long enough period will begin to believe that idea, no matter how ridiculous.

This is generally just an issue with media overall, rather than just in regards to stigmatization against the mentally ill. The news always tries to view situations from the works possible angle, and only share news that is considered negative.

I've always felt police should have training more focused on social work and the social aspects of their job. It leads to an overall more caring, respectful police force as they have a better understanding of the issues faced by the people they are arresting.

You'd think we as a society would have ensured by this point the people that actively decide who does nor does not spend time in prison are nearly devoid of prejudice, at least on the surface. It's saddening we haven't and likely won't for a long time.

One of the biggest issues with stigmatization and prejudice in general is how it becomes a recurring cycle. These people are treated unfairly due to the illness they suffer from, causing them to act out in ways society deems wrong, causing them to be stigmatized even more.

I wonder what the reasons for this are. Are people suffering from mental illness just natural more prone to criminal activity? Or is it because they had experiences in their life that led to the development of both the mental illness as well as the criminal tendencies? Could it be both?

Which is why people with a history of mental illness should really take precautions when using drugs (though obviously very single person should). Many drugs, even ones considered relatively "harmless", can lead to the emergence of anti-social tendencies (i.e. violence) and even new mental illnesses that person has not experienced up to that point.

Ironically, this is likely the most dangerous stereotype for mental illness. A fear that someone suffering from mental illness could hurt or harm someone and have no control over it has led to a lot of the hatred people with mental illnesses have faced.

With research into the cognitive aspects of both mental illness and criminal offenders being low for both topics, it's unsurprising that a convergence of the two also results in a lack of research. I'm glad some researchers are beginning to realize how useful it is to better understand these issues.

This is especially prevalent in regards to mental illness. Even if someone is suffering from something that makes them exhibit only a few odd behaviors, many people (especially in schools) will latch onto those few things in an attempt to make the person feel out of place for having them.

Which is a much needed discussion. When we still understand relatively little about mental illness as a whole, it's best to take every opportunity to spread knowledge on the subject to ensure people have a better understand of what it is and how to deal with it.

More examples of how this new view is useful. Knowing the complexities of the system can allow for a better ability to plan for the systems needs in the future.

This would prove especially useful in rehabilitation. A better understanding of the context the jail exists within and the community surrounding it can help to create more effective methods of rehabilitation into said community.

Another of the major reasons this new view on jail is beneficial. By addressing problems with the knowledge of the complexities of the system jails can more easily understand issues in the system, target them, and fix them.

It's surprising there hasn't been more work done on understanding the cognitive aspects of jail and how it can affect them. You'd think a better understanding of the cognition of inmates and prison staff would be wanted, especially as you could use this to make jails a better system overall.

This is likely the biggest benefit to a new view on jails. Being able to see the issues at large with the system and using the understanding of jail as a complex system to solve those issues. Viewing the prison system in this way leads to a better knowledge of how the system as a whole works, which is why it's easier to come up with solutions to the problems faced.

I understand what's meant to be said here; when parts of a complex system misunderstand what they've been told to do over a period of time there comes an increase of failures within the system. I just wish they went more in depth into how this applies to jails.

Mainly this seems to be meant in terms of a prison break. The prisoners are the networks looking to exploit weaknesses in the network of officers guarding the prison. Information flows through the system, informing the prisoners of weaknesses in the officer's network.

I'm only writing this and most of the annotations out so that I can create a better concept for what's being said so It's easier to read back later. If what I'm saying feels obvious that's fine.

Again, just an interesting point of view. Looking at jails as a complex system of interconnected parts makes it a lot easier to consider how the prison system works. Viewing every different change in the system as something that will create a chain of flowing changes throughout the rest definitely helps put things in perspective. It also makes me feel more inclined to view other things in life as a series of complex systems, rather than as narrowly as I do now.

.

I wish there was a bit more discussion on what these changes are. Is it the individual becoming more estranged from the system and being more likely to commit crime again? That's what I assume, but I'd like clarification.

This is an extremely interesting way to put it. This is largely the reason why I enjoy forensic psychology and criminal justice so much. The ability to look at things such as the prison system from a new, interesting perspective. Viewing the whole concept of reentry as a system consisting of the criminal, the public, and law enforcement really helps put it in perspective when considering it as a complex system.

This situation is a great example of why jails are considered complex systems. The reentry of an individual into society is at the tail end of the system, but before an individual reaches that point they must go through a huge number of adapting parts and changing information throughout their sentence. Whatever they experience, whatever information they gather or parts they interact with, can down the line effect their ability of reentry into society.

"Complexity science" is the study of complex systems, which is a category jails obviously falls into. The complexity of the prison system is what makes it so hard to research, and is what makes it nearly impossible to restructure how jails work and are viewed, as one single change could create a cascade in the whole system.

Very similar to the concept of "schema." Both are a way of describing how our brains contextualize and organize information into a basic structure. This creates a framework of preconceived ideas that help us have a baseline understanding of the functions of the world.

This is arguably one of the biggest issues with the justice system overall. Since many jails and the prison system as a whole in the U.S. isn't focusing on rehabilitation, we end up releasing thousands of individuals who've learned nothing from their stint in jail back into society at large. Should we spend more resources ensuring that these people are fully reformed, or save time and money by just releasing them when their time is up with no worry about recidivism?

This broad definition has led to forensic psychology not really having a single job description or list of the work done. It really just depends on what the forensic psychologist has been hired for and what their specialty is.

Shows try and portray forensic psychology as a tense battle between caseworkers and criminals, when in reality the job is usually much more relaxed and based more on communication with criminals over investigation.

They can also investigate general abuse cases, work with witnesses in regular cases, and evaluate adults in whatever trial they've been hired for.

Since the work a forensic psychologist does may vary, specializing to try and focus on a very specific area of work in the criminal justice system can ensure that you best contribute as a forensic psychologist by putting your abilities to work at what you're best at.

This is done usually in the cases of victim advocacy I mentioned before. A forensic psychologist might be tasked with advocating for a victim in court, ensuring that they help the victim through the criminal justice system and even help them with other issues related to the victims situation.

This is mainly done to try and decide the competency of an individual going to trial and whether or not they are mentally stable enough to be held fully responsible for their crimes. This is a very important part of ensuring the criminal justice system remains fair.

Not many schools actually offer courses in "Forensic Psychology" on its own. Midlands Tech does and so do others, but it isn't as widespread as it likely will be in a few years. Most people who do work as forensic psychologists mainly study in one of the fields listed here before applying their abilities to criminal justice.

CSI, Criminal Minds, Sherlock, and a huge variety of other shows and stories have led to a new generation of people with an interest in forensic psychology and criminal justice, even if the forms of those that these shows portray are a bit exaggerated.

Since forensic psychology is still relatively new, there hasn't really been any official designation of the type of work a "forensic psychologist" might do. Many different roles and tasks might be required of someone working in this field.

Just a few of the many responsibilities that someone who considers themselves a forensic psychologist will have. This list doesn't take into account other things like victim advocacy and general social work.

Glad to have learned a new word to use haha. Feels like one I should've already known the definition to without having to look it up though, not sure why.

Clearly the author can see the future. Perfectly described exactly what would happen.

Completely missed this when I watched the show. Glad the author (or whoever told them about the homage) is able to pay much closer attention to shows than I can so that I'm able to learn details like this.

I'm in a similar boat to the author in this situation. Not the biggest Marvel fan, but I did genuinely enjoy WandaVision and found the way it presented itself really interesting. Never found a Marvel film or show I like in the same way.

I'd say it's most certainly just a symptom. The political climate of most 1st world western countries both online and in the real world has been growing increasingly hostile in recent years, especially after Trump was elected in 2016. The "culture war" that's been happening for the last decade or so is almost entirely the cause for situations like the ones listed above in the article. There have always been people willing to harass or attack those they disagree with for their own gain, but the current climate of the internet has made that the standard response to most things someone doesn't like. It's unsurprising that those attitudes would find their way into pop-culture fandoms.

Probably one of the better analogies I've heard for Marvel movies and how they're represented in our culture. I feel it works even better than the theme parks analogy by Scorsese.

I really enjoy this whole quote. I've never really thought about the ways that television/film writing has changed throughout the last few decades, and this helped give me a bit of perspective. The bit about how television has developed based on the engagement of audiences was especially interesting, as I've never really considered that before.

Personally I feel like this isn't something with a general answer that is able to apply to most situations. The Sonic movie, for example, did benefit from the improvements it was given and they only served to make it a better product. Overall though I don't think the "art" of film-making will suffer all that much. Someone who is genuinely trying to create a piece of art will likely have a clear vision that won't be affected by their fans, and if it is it's probably under immense consideration. I honestly don't think the situation with the Sonic movie is similar. Maybe I'm wrong, but it doesn't seem like a film made for artistic purposes. It was just a big budget movie based on a huge pre-existing franchise created to make lots of money, so it makes sense why the creators might want to please fans.

I genuinely enjoy when a recap for a show includes lines from that episode, as really powerful, quotable lines are one of my favorite aspects of any good show. As someone who enjoys episode discussion and reading recaps, I wish more did this and had added discussion regarding the line. "Charles isn't wrong" isn't necessarily bad, but I wish they might've expanded on that a bit more.

Very astute (and true) observation by the writer. I totally agree

I'm glad that others are more easily able to notice details like this. Whether or not the fade was intentionally meant to be representative of the themes, analysis like this is really interesting to me.