Mealey's etiological distinction between primary and secondary sociopa
thy blurs the delineation between individual and group differences. Sh
e uses physiological evidence to support her claim of genetic influenc
es, neglecting variability within social classes, frequency of delinqu
ent behavior in upper and middle classes (measured by self-report), an
d discontinuity of criminal behavior across the life span. Finally, Me
aley's proposals for differential intervention fall short of a future
agenda, which should tailor to individual needs, not social classes.