Brain tumor caused pedophilia
January 9, 2013 at 9:15 pm
(This post was last modified: January 9, 2013 at 9:44 pm by Simon Moon.)
This is kind of an old story (2002), but it brings up some interesting questions.
Article
"The sudden and uncontrollable paedophilia exhibited by a 40-year-old man was caused by an egg-sized brain tumour, his doctors have told a scientific conference. And once the tumour had been removed, his sex-obsession disappeared.
The cancer was located in the right lobe of the orbifrontal cortex, which is known to be tied to judgment, impulse control and social behaviour."
The man had perfectly healthy sexual urges his entire life, then at the age of 40, he started having inappropriate sexual urges toward children. His wife caught him visiting child porn websites, and reported him to police.
He was admitted into the hospital for headaches, where a tumor was found. When the tumor was removed, his urges returned to normal.
Assuming that it is true that it was the tumor effecting his behavior (all evidence seems to confirm it is), does this man deserve to be punished for his behavior while under the influence of the tumor?
Article
"The sudden and uncontrollable paedophilia exhibited by a 40-year-old man was caused by an egg-sized brain tumour, his doctors have told a scientific conference. And once the tumour had been removed, his sex-obsession disappeared.
The cancer was located in the right lobe of the orbifrontal cortex, which is known to be tied to judgment, impulse control and social behaviour."
The man had perfectly healthy sexual urges his entire life, then at the age of 40, he started having inappropriate sexual urges toward children. His wife caught him visiting child porn websites, and reported him to police.
He was admitted into the hospital for headaches, where a tumor was found. When the tumor was removed, his urges returned to normal.
Assuming that it is true that it was the tumor effecting his behavior (all evidence seems to confirm it is), does this man deserve to be punished for his behavior while under the influence of the tumor?
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
