Metzl Jonathan M, MacLeish Kenneth T
Jonathan M. Metzl is with the Center for Medicine, Health, and Society and the Departments of Sociology and Psychiatry, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN. Kenneth T. MacLeish is with the Center for Medicine, Health, and Society and the Department of Anthropology, Vanderbilt University.
Am J Public Health. 2015 Feb;105(2):240-9. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2014.302242.
Four assumptions frequently arise in the aftermath of mass shootings in the United States: (1) that mental illness causes gun violence, (2) that psychiatric diagnosis can predict gun crime, (3) that shootings represent the deranged acts of mentally ill loners, and (4) that gun control "won't prevent" another Newtown (Connecticut school mass shooting). Each of these statements is certainly true in particular instances. Yet, as we show, notions of mental illness that emerge in relation to mass shootings frequently reflect larger cultural stereotypes and anxieties about matters such as race/ethnicity, social class, and politics. These issues become obscured when mass shootings come to stand in for all gun crime, and when "mentally ill" ceases to be a medical designation and becomes a sign of violent threat.
在美国大规模枪击事件发生后，经常会出现四种假设：（1）精神疾病导致枪支暴力；（2）精神科诊断可以预测枪支犯罪；（3）枪击事件是患有精神疾病的孤独者的疯狂行为；（4）枪支管制“无法防止”另一起纽敦（康涅狄格州校园枪击案）事件的发生。这些说法在某些特定情况下当然是正确的。然而，正如我们所表明的，与大规模枪击事件相关的精神疾病观念往往反映了关于种族/族裔、社会阶层和政治等问题的更广泛的文化刻板印象和焦虑情绪。当大规模枪击事件代表了所有枪支犯罪，且“精神疾病患者”不再是一个医学术语，而成为暴力威胁的标志时，这些问题就变得模糊不清了。
