Section 82. (c) Senility.

It would seem that we lawyers have taken insufficient account of the

characteristics of senility. These characteristics are as definitive as

those of childhood or of sex, and to overlook them may lead to serious

consequences. We shall not consider that degree of old age which is

called second childhood. At that stage the question seriously arises

whether we are not dealing with the idiocy of age, or at least with a

weakness of perception and of memory so obvious that they can not be

mistaken.

The important stage is the one which precedes this, and in which a

definite decline in mental power is not yet perceivable. Just as we see

the first stage of early youth come to an end when the distinction

between boy and girl becomes altogether definite, so we may observe that

the important activity of the process of life has run its course when

this distinction begins to degenerate. It is essentially defined by the

approximation to each other of the external appearance of the two

sexes,--their voices, their inner character, and their attitude. What is

typically masculine or feminine disappears. It is at this point that

extreme old age begins. The number of years, the degree of intelligence,

education, and other differences are of small importance, and the

ensuing particularities may be easily deduced by a consideration of the

nature of extreme old age. The task of life is ended, because the

physical powers have no longer any scope. For the same reason resistance

to enemies has become lessened, courage has decreased, care about

physical welfare increased, everything occurs more slowly and with

greater difficulty, and all because of the newly-arrived weakness which,

from now on, becomes the denotative trait of that whole bit of human

nature. Hence, Lombroso[289] is not wrong in saying that the

characteristic diseases of extreme old age are rarer among women than

among men. This is so because the change in women is not so sudden, nor

so powerful, since they are weak to begin with, while man becomes a weak

graybeard suddenly and out of the fullness of his manly strength. The

change is so great, the difference so significant and painful, that the

consequence must be a series of unpleasant properties,--egoism,

excitability, moroseness, cruelty, etc. It is significant that the very

old man assumes all those unpleasant characteristics we note in

eunuchs--they result from the consciousness of having lost power.

It is from this fact that Kraus (loc. cit.) deduces the crimes of

extreme old age. “The excitable weakness of the old man brings him into

great danger of becoming a criminal. The excitability is opposed to

slowness and one-sidedness in thought; he is easily surprised by

irrelevancies; he is torn from his drowse, and behaves like a somnolent

drunkard.... The very old individual is a fanatic about rest--every

disturbance of his rest troubles him. Hence, all his anger, all his

teasing and quarreling, all his obstinacy and stiffness, have a single

device: ‘Let me alone.’”

This somnolent drunkenness is variously valued. Henry Holland, in one of

his “Fragmentary Papers,” said that age approximates a condition of

dreams in which illusion and reality are easily confused. But this can

be true only of the last stages of extreme old age, when life has become

a very weak, vegetative function, but hardly any crimes are committed by

people in this stage.

It would be simpler to say that the old man’s weakness gives the earlier

tendencies of his youth a definite direction which may lead to crime.

All diseases develop in the direction of the newly developing weakness.

But selfishness or greed are not young. Hence we must assume that an

aging man who has turned miser began by being prudent, but that he did

not deny himself and his friends because he knew that he was able to

restore, later, what they consumed. Now he is old and weak, he knows

that he can no longer do this easily, i.e., that his money and property

are all that he has to depend on in his old age, and hence, he is very

much afraid of losing or decreasing them, so that his prudence becomes

miserliness, later mania for possession, and even worse; finally it may

turn him into a criminal.

The situation is the same sexually. Too weak to satisfy natural

instincts in adults, he attacks immature girls, and his fear of people

he can no longer otherwise oppose turns him into a poisoner. Drobisch

finds that by reason of the alteration of characteristics, definite

elements of the self are distinguishable at every stage. The

distinguishing element in extreme old age, in senility, is the loss of

power, and if we keep this in mind we shall be able to explain every

phenomenon characteristic of this period.

Senile individuals require especial treatment as witnesses. An accurate

study of such people and of the not over-rich literature concerning them

will, however, yield a sufficient basis to go on. What is most important

can be found in any text-book on psychology. The individual cases are

considerably helped by the assumption that the mental organization of

senility is essentially simplified and narrowed to a few types. Its

activities are lessened, its influences and aims are compressed, the

present brings little and is little remembered, so that its collective

character is determined by a resultant, composed of those forces that

have influenced the man’s past life. Accurate observation will reveal

only two types of senility.[290] There is the embittered type, and there

is the character expressed in the phrase, “to understand all is to

forgive all.” Senility rarely succeeds in presenting facts objectively.

Everything it tells is bound up with its judgment, and its judgment is

either negative or positive. The judgment’s nature depends less on the

old man’s emotional character than on his experience in life. If he is

one of the embittered, he will probably so describe a possibly harmful,

but not bad event, as to be able to complain of the wickedness of the

world, which brought it about, that at one time such and such an evil

happened to him. The excusing senile will begin with “Good God, it

wasn’t so bad. The people were young and merry, and so one of them--.”

That the same event is presented in a fundamentally different light by

each is obvious. Fortunately, the senile is easily seen through and his

first words show how he looks at things. He makes difficulties mainly by

introducing memories which always color and modify the evidence. The

familiar fact that very old men remember things long past better than

immediate occurrences, is to be explained by the situation that the

ancient brain retains only that which it has frequently experienced. Old

experiences are recalled in memory hundreds and hundreds of times, and

hence, may take deep root there, while the new could be repeated, only a

few times, and hence had not time to find a place before being

forgotten. If the old man tells of some recent event, some similar

remote event is also alive in his mind. The latter has, however, if not

more vivid at least equally vigorous color, so that the old man’s story

is frequently composed of things long past. I do not know how to

eliminate these old memories from this story. There are always

difficulties, particularly as personal experiences of evil generally

dominate these memories. It is not unjust, that proverb which says “If

youth is at all silly, old age remembers it well.”

Criminal Psychology: A Manual for Judges, Practitioners, and Students · 第 49 / 79 章