Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

"Stockholm Syndrome" was invented by police to discredit a female hostage (2020)

stadafa.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 71 posts

Re: "Stockholm Syndrome" was invented by police to discredit a female hostage (2020)

#41

Post by engineer_22 »

jjk166 wrote: post #14
andrewla wrote: post #8

I'm glad to learn more about the incident itself, but honestly the article does not give me a real reason to doubt that the phenomenon is real. Calling it a "diagnosis" is an attempt to medicalize it, which seems ridiculous as it is so incredibly situation-specific. And they in turn use this to attempt to undermine the "diagnosis" by a psychiatrist who never met with the patient; clearly meeting the patient and being…

> they sided with their captors against the authorities. Because the authorities told them point blank they would rather the hostages die than the captors walk free. That's not some unique phenomenon, that's what any rational person would do. In the last paragraph, the article states a 2008 review basically found that stockholm syndrome is pop science, not a well defined and experimentally verified phenomenon. While…

Quiet so. The article suggest the police and government offered no reassurances to the hostages, gambled with their lives, and to top it all off tear gassed them.

I'd be less-than-thrilled, too.

Re: "Stockholm Syndrome" was invented by police to discredit a female hostage (2020)

#42

Post by engineer_22 »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #37
jjk166 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sensing that their likelihood of survival was getting slimmer by the hour, Enmark took matters into her own hands. She called the Swedish prime minister, Olof Palme, and begged him to let her and another hostage leave the bank with their captors. ‘I fully trust Clark and the robber,’ she told Palme. ‘I am not desperate. They haven’t done athing to us. On the contrary, they have been very nice. But you know, Olof, w…

But how can a rational person believe the police is at fault compared to captors like it's a normal thing to take hostages?

Humans aren't rational, they're made of flesh and blood.

Re: "Stockholm Syndrome" was invented by police to discredit a female hostage (2020)

#44

Post by potato3983 »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #37
jjk166 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sensing that their likelihood of survival was getting slimmer by the hour, Enmark took matters into her own hands. She called the Swedish prime minister, Olof Palme, and begged him to let her and another hostage leave the bank with their captors. ‘I fully trust Clark and the robber,’ she told Palme. ‘I am not desperate. They haven’t done athing to us. On the contrary, they have been very nice. But you know, Olof, w…

But how can a rational person believe the police is at fault compared to captors like it's a normal thing to take hostages?

In the moment it's not a question of fault or good vs bad. It's a question of who do you cast your lot in with in order to have a better chance of exiting the situation alive. Stuff like helping law enforcement or getting back at the bad guys only matters so long as it isn't likely to get you dead.

You're valuable to the hostage takers so long as you're alive. Your continued existence is a nuisance to the police. But obviously the police with their infinite money and manpower have better odds on their side. Situation specific facts must be taken into consideration, etc, etc.

Re: "Stockholm Syndrome" was invented by police to discredit a female hostage (2020)

#45

Post by lbwtaylor »

engineer_22 wrote: post #41
jjk166 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they sided with their captors against the authorities. Because the authorities told them point blank they would rather the hostages die than the captors walk free. That's not some unique phenomenon, that's what any rational person would do. In the last paragraph, the article states a 2008 review basically found that stockholm syndrome is pop science, not a well defined and experimentally verified phenomenon. While…

Quiet so. The article suggest the police and government offered no reassurances to the hostages, gambled with their lives, and to top it all off tear gassed them. I'd be less-than-thrilled, too.

But the hostage takers are the ones who created the hostage situation, not the police. They are the ones that caused the risk to the lives of the hostages - in fact that it the whole purpose of hostage taking, to use human lives as bargaining chips.

I understand it is rational to want the police to cooperate with hostage takers if you are a hostage. But if the police successfully orchestrate a rescue, how is it rational to prefer the hostage takers to the police? One created the problem, one solved it?

Re: "Stockholm Syndrome" was invented by police to discredit a female hostage (2020)

#46

Post by FireBeyond »

giraffe_lady wrote: post #32
LorenPechtel wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is it happens even when tasers aren't involved. The reality is that if you pump somebody up enough with stimulants there's a possibility that the rebound is fatal.

But how often does it happen when cops aren't involved. If this were a medical phenomenon we'd expect to see familiarity with it among emergency room staff, homeless outreach, and other front line mental health workers. Do we?

As a paramedic, we often do see these effects (and not withstanding the valid negatives of 'excited delirium') as a first order effect of synthetic cathinone ("bath salt") abuse:

- stripping down because of overheating - this also causes tachypnea (rapid breathing) as the body looks for any means, efficient or not, to try to bleed off excess heat

- frank bruxism (teeth grinding) to the point of craving 'gnawing' (this is where the "trying to eat people" sensationalist stories come from - there's no homicidal intent, it's 'just' "people are chewy")

- reflection fixation (often with glass). Similar to other psychoactives, reflections in glass provide a stimulant effect. With this, the most problematic thing is that some of the most common objects with glass in them are moving (i.e. cars), which heightens the effect, and causes a danger to self and others.

The challenge is that many of these behaviors, in public, are... "antisocial" and rapidly lead to police involvement.

Notwithstanding what I believe is cynical CYA by some "less-lethal" manufacturers to glom onto this, the small mercy in my area is that the higher levels of police command have directed that these situations be treated as the medical emergency they are, and not a law enforcement issue. Indeed, protocol here is that LE should be used for restraint both as a last resort, and for the shortest possible time before the patient can be transitioned to "chemical restraint", i.e. sedation, at least with capnography (to monitor breathing), if not active ventilation as needed.

Re: "Stockholm Syndrome" was invented by police to discredit a female hostage (2020)

#47

Post by lbwtaylor »

GeoAtreides wrote: post #40
mewpmewp2 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But how can a rational person believe the police is at fault compared to captors like it's a normal thing to take hostages?

Surely the question is whose fault it is, but whose side offers more chances for survival; apparently, in this case, it was the wrong side.

You can desire the police cooperate with the hostage takers, without taking the side of the hostage takers.

The proof is in the pudding - the police ended the hostage taking with no lives lost. To after the fact continue to take the side of the hostage takers is pretty terrible to me. All of this is Olsson's fault.

Re: "Stockholm Syndrome" was invented by police to discredit a female hostage (2020)

#48

Post by octopoc »

lbwtaylor wrote: post #47
GeoAtreides wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely the question is whose fault it is, but whose side offers more chances for survival; apparently, in this case, it was the wrong side.

You can desire the police cooperate with the hostage takers, without taking the side of the hostage takers. The proof is in the pudding - the police ended the hostage taking with no lives lost. To after the fact continue to take the side of the hostage takers is pretty terrible to me. All of this is Olsson's fault.

What constitutes "taking the hostage takers' side"? She's not begging that the police release the perps, she's not saying that they were within their rights to rob the bank or anything like that. It's more complicated than just "she is taking the police's side" vs "she is taking the perps' side".

Re: "Stockholm Syndrome" was invented by police to discredit a female hostage (2020)

#49

Post by pasabagi »

lbwtaylor wrote: post #45
engineer_22 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quiet so. The article suggest the police and government offered no reassurances to the hostages, gambled with their lives, and to top it all off tear gassed them. I'd be less-than-thrilled, too.

But the hostage takers are the ones who created the hostage situation, not the police. They are the ones that caused the risk to the lives of the hostages - in fact that it the whole purpose of hostage taking, to use human lives as bargaining chips. I understand it is rational to want the police to cooperate with hostage takers if you are a hostage. But if the police successfully orchestrate a rescue, how is it ratio…

The expectations for hostage-takers are pretty low, whereas the expectations for police are, if not sky-high, at least that they won't kill or injure you.

Disappointment is often proportionate to anger.

There's a second point which is, from a political perspective, police behaviour can be easily changed. Desperate criminal behaviour cannot.

Re: "Stockholm Syndrome" was invented by police to discredit a female hostage (2020)

#50

Post by almatabata »

jjk166 wrote: post #31
almatabata wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well you have many examples of man and women who display this seemingly irrational behavior. Saying its not real leaves the question why the victims side with the perpetrator in those scenarios.

Do you have any examples where the victims side with the perpetrator and after exhaustive search there isn't any rational explanation for them doing so? Assuming there is some condition that causes people to display a particular irrational behavior is typically god-of-the-gaps thinking - that you don't understand their motivations does not mean they don't have them.

I do not have access to first hand accounts nor detailed records that would allow me to to make such an analysis. I only have access to stories that look irrational from the outside.

I would like to see more rigorous study of it. If they find its nonsense fine. We can move on to something else. They might find something else entirely.

Post reply on HN