Ultimately, what everyone wants is PREVENTION.

Val's Take:   We're slowly moving away from the Adversary System to a more Collaborative Approach --- a more Problem-Solving Approach.

Given modern science on AGGRESSION --- one of the problems with the Adversary System --- it tends to make everyone  in it --- MORE AGGRESSIVE in relative terms.  

The Legal System was really designed in the beginning to be an ALTERNATIVE to the BLOOD FEUD.   And from that vantage point, the Adversary Legal System was a big step up.

Historically, there actually have been numerous reform efforts over hundreds of years.   It seems like we're getting  the medical  understanding  of  the  biological basis  of behavior.  It's more complicated than we thought and not always what we thought historically, most notably the immune system and the immune system in the brain seem very important.

The more we can de-personalize illness or dysregulation ---- the more we can get on the same page.  In many cases, people themselves will be advocating for the healthcare they need.

The Today Show
Sing Sing Files

PBS
Insanity

Scape·goat
/ˈskāpˌɡōt/noun
1. a person who is blamed for the wrongdoings, mistakes, or faults of others, especially for reasons of expediency.

When we start talking about "AGGRESSION" in human society ---- it is extremely complicated, not least of which because human beings are  AGGRESSIVE and we're "TOP PREDATOR."

I don't perceive "AGGRESSION" or "BULLYING" to be particularly rare among CHILDREN, ADOLESCENTS or ADULTS.

• BUT there can be extreme differences in the level and intensity of that.
• Further, most of us are trying to MASK our "AGGRESSION" --- some more successfully than others --- But usually at some point the MASK comes off.
• As that MASKING has its limits, we try to TRANSFORM that AGGRESSION.
  

Further, if we weren't "AGGRESSIVE" to some extent --- we wouldn't be able to survive.

There are a lot of ways we try to deal with that "AGGRESSION" on a micro and macro level.

By and large --- we're often focused on "Who's to blame?"

• That is not only what the LAW is focused on but it is also how we're pretty hard-wired to understand things.
• We do need to understand "SPECIFIC" situations and "SPECIFIC" People>
  
• Once you get enough EXAMPLES, I think we start seeing "PATTERNS"
• BUT --- those patterns are generally IMPERFECT PATTERNS that need to be subject to REVISION and MODIFICATION for good cause.
  

I think the DSM 5 is an imperfect collection of "SYMPTOM CLUSTERS," and biological research and researchers are pushing the need to reform these CATEGORIES.

• As CU Researchers have advised, let's get to something that is more grounded in individualized, precision medicine and "A LITTLE LESS BY THE BOOK [meaning the DSM 5]."
  

The UBIQUITOUS nature of:

• Neuro-Developmental Disorders
• Psychiatric Disorders,
• Metabolic Problems and
• Chronic Disease in the Society
  • is pushing new understandings.
    

Are "lifestyle choices" irrelevant --- no, BUT this is starting to look more complicated and in many cases DEVELOPMENTAL ISSUES and EPIGENETICS appear to be playing LARGE ROLES.

Further, maybe we knew that the IMMUNE SYSTEM was involved with Multiple Sclerosis and Cancer ---

• How many of us knew the immune system was involved with Metabolism (this is a lot more than how much people weigh),
• Further,  researchers are using METABOLOMIC BIOMARKERS to identify people with psychiatric disorders.
• Maternal Immune Activation is greatly associated with neuro-developmental and psychiatric disorders.
  

One of the things that happened with the "ENLIGHTENMENT" and "WOKENESS" for that matter is people who really want to change things --- see them as SYSTEMIC.

The "Enlightenment" wasn't just a Political Enlightenment it was also a Scientific Enlightenment.

Stephen Hawking saw AGGRESSION as the primary problem facing Humanity --- and he absolutely understood that it had led to our SURVIVAL.

When we start thinking about things Systemically ---

• We start identifying more Stakeholders
• Often Complicated Challenges
• The need to engage in INTEGRATIVE THINKING
• And more often than not the need to come up with THIRD ALTERNATIVES.

Additionally, the more we start to look at this --- the more LATERAL THINKING may be possible.

What is Lateral Thinking?

"Lateral thinking (horizontal thinking) is a form of ideation where designers approach problems by using reasoning that is disruptive or not immediately obvious.

"They use indirect and creative methods to think outside the box and see problems from radically new angles, gaining insights to help find innovative solutions."