The Persistence of Police Culture - Assignment Example

Issues in contemporary policing The persistence of ‘police culture’ has been considered a serious obstacle to reform. Discuss. Introduction: The term‘police culture’ denotes several different features of policing. It indicates the "us versus them" attitude that is attributed to police forces nearly everywhere. The term ‘them’ can be used to signify ‘community’, ‘criminals’ and ‘senior police officials’. It can also refer to police stances towards the application of their discretionary powers, particularly where the end (protecting society from criminals) is deemed to justify the means (for example, unlawful investigations, extreme use of force and deceitful testimony). Finally, it can refer to the strong feeling of faithfulness towards and unity with fellow officials. Faithfulness to and harmony with one’s associate police officers is essential for effectual and safe police work. Police often operate at the peripheries of society in circumstances where they cope with armed or otherwise treacherous suspects, as well as with annoyed or infuriated citizens. Teamwork is vital so as to support fellow officers in difficult or dangerous arguments. Additionally, each officer is accountable for using his own judgment in dealing with such circumstances. He must trust his associates to realize that the application of his discretionary powers is weighed down with peril, and be compassionate in assessing his actions. These are powers that can considerably influence the lives of citizens (for instance, the powers of investigation, custody and the use of authority). There is adequate truth in the statement that only other police officials can truly comprehend the reactions of one who must make instant decisions in situations where the possibility for violence is present (Westwood: n.d.). The criminal justice organizations have various organizational cultures owing to their diverse work environments, occupations and experiences. The culture of police arises from their relations with a variety of characteristic work environments; work-related issues such as danger and the power to use coercive methods, as well as organizational aspects such as role ambiguity and administrator scrutiny. This culture leads to strain and anxiety. In order to deal with these environmental aspects, police officers build up some dealing mechanisms which, consecutively, shape a lot of of the cultural traits of the police. Police culture studies have usually emphasized on the cultural mannerisms of street level police officials. The cultural characteristics noted in such studies are crookedness, distrust, cynicism, furtiveness, commonality, communal isolation, masculinity, and the crime fighter illustration. Some studies also report for the subsistence of manifold cultures inside a police force (Bodor, Thompson and Demircivi: 2004, p. 5-6). The culture of police: There are several factors which can be linked with drug-associated police fraud, although these issues may also be connected with police dishonesty in general (Law Enforcement: Information on Drug-Related Police Corruption: 1998, p. 4). Across United States of America, police offer definite fundamental services - defending life and property, safeguarding the peace, avoidance of criminality and the apprehension of illegal suspects. In spite of these fundamental principles, the entire departments have their own personal characteristics. The size of the organization, the organizational arrangement, society norms and local demographics are a few of the variables that affect police departments. The organizational culture existing in the majority of police departments is identical. Any effort to develop the disciplinary procedure without thinking about this culture would be unproductive. Without amending managerial culture, positive alteration will be smothered. Historically police reformers have nobly sought to make optimistic alteration, only to meet breakdown. A lot of these failures can be attributed to the current police culture (Barry: 1999, p. 25). From the day officials join a police department, until the day they leave, they are considered as associates of brotherhood. This brotherhood plays a significant role in the way officials view themselves and the globe around them. Police misconduct is hard to investigate owing to officers’ lack of sincerity in confirming about the behavior of fellow officials. This fraudulence is often observed by executive officials as tolerable, because nobody wants to betray his fellow official. As seen in the regions of New York and New Orleans, this sometimes even incorporates criminal activities. This code of silence has brought about police misbehavior which has become an acknowledged behavior within the police departments. Officials are educated early in their career of the significance of loyalty to fellow officials. Faithfulness to their society, the oath of office and the code of morals are not highlighted as much as is loyalty to fellow officials. By contrast, officials must be taught that loyalty, to be righteous, needs to be guided at the proper end. When officials place faithfulness to each other over the society, police misbehavior expands. The qualities of loyalty and honesty need to be inspected in addressing this subject. Misplaced faithfulness is a major aspect in continued police misbehavior. Police culture permits misplaced faithfulness to thrive, rationalizing it as element of the brotherhood. Police executives need to guarantee that honesty is supreme within their departments. Only when a zero acceptance approach is considered towards lying, will the code of silence be minimized? Dishonesty is mismatched with the role of police, code of ethics and their oath of office. It has been observed that the police executives overlook lies within their departments by compensating discipline for prolonged cases of dishonesty (Barry: 1999, p. 25-26). Police culture: A barrier to police reform Chan (1997) has talked about the police culture which is often thought as both a cause of police deviance and a barrier for police reform. In this study of police racism and police reform in Australia, Janet Chan offers a critical evaluation of police initiative in response to the problem of police-minorities associations. The book inspects the dynamics of alteration and confrontation within an organization and detains the intricacy and randomness of the alteration procedure. It questions the utility of the conventional idea of police culture and suggests a new structure for comprehending the interrelationships among the structural circumstances of police work, police cultural knowledge, and police practice. The behavior of police officials and the performance of police associations are increasingly under public inspection in recent years, following exposures of systemic fraud and malpractice in a number of police forces. Improving the police has become a pressing element on the political schedule of governments. At a time when the requirement for alteration seems more urgent, it is vital to consider our state of knowledge about alteration. While political exigency may have created exceptional opportunities and an encouraging climate for extensive reforms, there is substantial danger in pushing alteration for the sake of modification (Chan: 1997, p. 1). The problems of associations and minorities are more or less identical in all countries where anxiety and clash often exist between the police and noticeable racial minorities. Minorities protest against racist stereotyping, unjust targeting and sometimes pestering and aggressive treatment by police officials. A lot of members of the minorities groups of people are frightened of the police and do not believe them. A number of them are unwilling to report offense or lend a hand in police investigation. However, the problem is not consistently severe across all noticeable minority groups. In Australia, associations are traditionally poor between police and aboriginal individuals, even though a small number of ethnic groups for example, Vietnamese are beginning to voice anxieties about violent police treatment. Relations are also pitiable between police and young individuals, with destitute or jobless youth from noticeable minority groups being the most susceptible targets of police pestering (Chan: 1997, p. 2). A lot of the problems that exist between police and perceptible minority groups can be expediently identified as features of “police racism”, even though it is an inexact and sensitive term which can sometimes puzzle rather than elucidate the nature of the problems. If we accept the definition of racism given by Castels in 1992, then ‘police racism’ refers to the procedure whereby police officials stigmatize, pester, criminalize, or otherwise distinguish against other communal groups through the application of their special authorities. Like other types of racism, police racism is not a stationary or simple phenomenon. It occurs in many circumstances, takes many shapes, and diversifies in intensity according to time and location (Chan: 1997, p. 17). Symptoms of police racism can vary from detrimental attitudes and biased law-enforcement practices, to the illegitimate use of aggression against associates of minority groups. ‘Over-policing’ of Aboriginal individuals is another feature which has been the issue of a great number of research studies and investigations in most of the countries (Chan: 1997, p. 18). Associations between Aborigines and police in Redfern had been a trouble for at least 20 years. Among the problems essayed in the late 1960s and early 1970s were the grievances that Aborigines were frequently arrested without reason and were subjected to a police-forced curfew. The satire of the public shame of the New South Wales police in 1992 is that it came at a time when the power had been undergoing key organizational and cultural modifications for a number of years. In 1984, a police panel was formed and John Avery was employed as Police Commissioner. His intention was to free the force of institutionalized corruption and unlock the door to a novel police culture in which service to the society is a key incentive for police work. A lot of sweeping alterations were introduced, including an absolute restructuring of command arrangement, the implementation of new staffing criteria and teaching programs and the acceptance of society-based policing as the major operational approach. A few proposals were specifically intended at developing police –minority associations (Chan: 1997, p. 3). Ethics behind police culture: When an individual turns to be a police officer they are required to productively complete the academy and field teaching program. During the academy and field guidance, they learn about a lot of subjects including criminal rule, cynical tactics, oral judo and other essential subjects. The most significant subject learned during this teaching procedure is how to survive in the police culture. No written tests is ever taken on this topic, however to do well proficiently this knowledge is very important (Barry: 1999, p. 26). In the police profession this culture has a very strong manipulation on the conduct of officials. Physical symptoms of the culture can effortlessly be recognized. Weapons, uniforms, emblems of rank, report forms and particular police vehicles are a number of the more universal relics of the police culture. Harder to identify, yet much more influential, is the effect this culture has on individual performance (Barry: 1999, p. 27). The workplace culture is the sum of the viewpoints and principles held in common by those within the agency. These values and ideas become instructed in the minds of new officials. This remains to be a significant issue throughout the officer’s profession. New officials soon fail to keep in mind numerous notions taught in the academy; however they will by no means lose prospect of their police culture. This culture is all-encompassing throughout the organization, ensuring that these principles are established in the minds of all wearing an insignia. The culture of a community exercises very strong influences on individuals, but it must be realized that there are huge differentiations among cultures of various communities, and what is suitable in one may not be suitable in another. In some communities, community bathing is the custom. The Community Bathing Program is a support service offered to assist individuals residing at home to stay independent. Such behavior is considered substandard in our community and is subject to lawful as well as ethical sanction. Culture largely manipulates job inspiration and work practices. The culture affects work habits and it is accountable for both good and bad performance. It would not be justifiable to explore police misbehavior without addressing police culture. Without taking into consideration the impact of culture on individual behavior, a precise depiction of misbehavior cannot be observed. This culture is often damaging to the character of police officials (Barry: 1999, p. 27-28). Recommendations: Police leaders can absolutely alter the police culture, thereby diminishing the code of silence by centering on these accountabilities: to expand a career development program for all officials. This program will cheer officials to fully make use of their God-given attributes; in order to address police conformity officials need to be familiar with their own proposals. This is the foundation stone of Community Oriented Policing. Officials need to be capable of convincing their own career requirements by focusing training in specialized regions. Police executives need to improve the careers of assistant officials by career counseling. When officials are supported to be present at training, arrange directed patrols and instruct others, they have an augmented level of job contentment. Officials need to be prized for honorable conduct. There is requirement to offer ethics training for all officials, throughout their careers. This training needs to incorporate the good worth of faithfulness. This asset is often misinterpreted, leading to misbehavior going unreported. The officials need to be cheered so as to participate in society functions, both on and off duty. Training, tutoring and taking part on town boards are only a number of activities which will minimize isolation. Officials who take part in society functions should be identified by the department. The officials should be made sure of the fact that lying will not be accepted by the management. All continued cases of dishonesty should receive strong regulation. Officials need to know that deceitfulness will not be tolerated. By only evaluating discipline for dishonesty, supervisors are overlooking the code of silence. The chief of the organization needs to take a zero tolerance approach to lying. When officials understand the department is serious about sincerity, the code of silence will be greatly lessened (Barry: 1999, p. 47-49). Officials need to be guided in the importance of honesty. While most officials remember they took an oath of office prior to graduating from the academy, a small number of them truly recognize its significance. Likewise, most officials know a code of ethics exists, however a small number of them recognize what it implies. Classes need to be provided throughout an official’s career guaranteeing these key texts are not forgotten. Case studies on officials who have discolored their badges need to be incorporated in this training. Instead of retaining past misbehavior a secret; these can serve as precious lessons for other officials. This training needs to be an element of an official’s complete career, not merely a class in the training academy. It must be ensured that executive rights are not bargained away. Police administrative should never settle away decision-making rights and accountabilities as element of the negotiation procedure. By doing this they are ensuring officials understand that misbehavior is a serious priority of the supervisor. The administrators are supposed to be responsible for the activities of their subordinates. Administrators who are aware of misbehavior and fail to take suitable action need to be held answerable. On the other hand, those who do this task need to be admired and acknowledged. In contemporary police service, organizers must do more than articulate right conduct; they must reveal right conduct. The leader must make sure that the organization’s values and main beliefs are expressed, and he or she should incorporate input from the subdivision’s stakeholders. The person in charge then must offer follow through and guarantee that the values and main beliefs are articulated, communicated, and strengthened throughout all features of the department’s processes, management, and service (Barry: 1999, p. 49). Conclusion: Law Enforcement is not the only line of work with an influential code of silence. What makes this code exclusive in law enforcement is the fact supervisors deny its subsistence. This code generates serious problems in the tackling with police misbehavior. The code of silence is implanted in the managerial culture, making alteration difficult. Police chiefs can develop their departments by admitting the subsistence of the code of silence, and handling misbehavior from within a moral structure. It has been observed that police culture supports conformity among all officials. While conformity is an asset developing operational effectiveness, it also can be damaging to the well-being of officials. When officials act contrary to their individual principles, surrendering to group needs, they are being self-damaging. In revolutionizing this culture, an aim has to be constructing an atmosphere where both independence and teamwork are appreciated. Separation from the public is the second confrontation which needs to be addressed. The police culture promotes an attitude that police officials are apart from, rather than, a part of the society. When this is the situation, officials can downsize thinking of citizens as less significant than fellow officials. Another intention for persons in charge in improving this police culture needs to highlight on decreasing police isolationism. In meeting both these goals, persons in charge must set the paradigm. Only when administrators hold themselves responsible, they can anticipate the same of others. Cultivating an atmosphere that prizes individual originality and the qualities of good faithfulness, honesty and justice, will go a long way in lessening the humiliating influences. The person in charge must reward optimistic conduct and shift speedily to address offenses. Influential should enroll others, within and outwardly, to resolve integrity concerns. The goal of every police person-in-charge should be to make an ambiance of a total and inclusive “us” that incorporates the society, rather that an “us against them attitude”. Management in a police department is not restricted or described by rank. Those in administrative positions have a responsibility to develop administrators’ abilities and induce them to presume a superior role in sustaining integrity. Integrity matters should not be surrendered to an inner unit or authority until all options to cope with them within the smallest division have been tired out. In this view, the first-line administrator supposes a key management role in ensuring that workers stick to high values of professional conduct and searching out those who infringe these principles (Barry: 1999, p. 49-50). References: 1. Barry, D.P. (Dec. 1999). “Handling Police Misconduct in an ethical way”. Available at: http://www.neiassociates.org/barrythesis.pdf (Accessed on Dec 1, 2009). 2. Bodor, T, Thompson, F, Demircivi, F. (May 27, 2004). “Criminal Justice Cultures in the United States: A Context for Understanding Aspects of Organizational Change”. Available at: http://www.ctg.albany.edu/publications/journals/hpa_2004_criminal/hpa_2004_criminal.pdf (Accessed on Dec 1, 2009). 3. Chan, J.B.L. (1997). Changing police culture: policing in a multicultural society. Cambridge University Press (Cambridge). 4. “Law Enforcement: Information on Drug-Related Police Corruption”. (May, 1998). United States General Accounting Office. Available at: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/gg98111.pdf (Accessed on Dec 1, 2009). 5. Westwood, J. (n.d.) “Police Culture and the Code of Silence”. Available at: http://www.opcc.bc.ca/Reports/2001/POLICE%20CULTURE%20AND%20THE%20CODE%20OF%20SILENCE.pdf (Accessed on Dec 1, 2009). Read More