Criminological Theory - Research Paper Example

Criminological theory: Labeling theory Abstract This paper deals with the labeling theory as the relevant theory in the modern interpretation of the criminological theory. Further on we’ll focus our attention on labeling theory. This theory in terms of criminology is rather specific and its peculiarities are interesting for the development of criminology in the modern context. Introduction The relevance of criminological theory, which was invented in nineteenth century, cannot be questioned. There are different interpretations of crime commitment, provided by famous theorists of criminological theory. In accordance with labeling theory, it should be noted the way a certain act is labeled as a criminal act. Crimes differ from place to place and it is relevant to consider each case under certain/specific conditions. Unfortunately, law is considered to be “the same for all the people” that means that cases are judged according to common rules, notwithstanding that some of them need special attention. Labeling theory has been developed with regards to social constructionist theory. In accordance with the labeling theory, crime is a defined set of symbols, assigned to this social act by a representative of the society by other members of the society.   Historical overview of labeling theory      Tannenbaum (1938) can be considered one of the first labeling theorists. He claimed that interpretation of evil and an individual’s attitude to evil identifies his potential criminal behavior (cited by Clarke). In accordance with   Lemert (1951) the "societal reaction" approach was suggested. This approach was characterized by differentiation of primary and secondary deviance (i.e. acceptance/non acceptance of the deviant status by a criminal). Becker (1963) was focused on conceptual development of “moral entrepreneurs”, or members of the society who could label a certain way of a criminal’s behavior as violating the law (cited by Clarke).        Currently, there are some points borrowed from labeling theory, which refer to social constructivist considerations.   In accordance with modern representatives of labeling theory, the societies create crimes by developing the laws. The essence and the nature of the law should be considered with regards to social reactions expressed by the society concerning one or another law.   Modern theorists of labeling theory underline the necessity to focus on “controlology” or a group of theories focused on “moral panics, but mostly the view that criminal justice agencies are part of broader social control mechanisms, like welfare, mental health, education, the military, and the mass media, all of which are used by the state to control "problem" populations” (Arvanites 1992). This aspect of labeling theory refers to Foucault’s theory, which was focused on the important role of different instruments of social control. Deviance should have been considered by the society from a tolerant point of view and not to show a state’s “iron fist” to control over challenging populations. Another point of view is expressed by Jack Katz (1988) who wrote the book “Seductions of Crime”. This author was focused on aphemenological interpretation of causation of crime. Katz develops his theory on the basis of discussion of real events, biographies, ethnographies etc with regards to real events. Basing on the events analysis it is suggested that it is better to avoid legalistic terminology and focus more on real events from criminology (Anderson, 1999). Generally speaking, Katz claims that a crime is the result of an individual’s reaction to humiliation. He describes a crime occurrence in the following terms: “Cursing by the attacker and silent prayers by the victim are treated as priestly omens and sacrificial service honoring the sacred which must be approached by a “leap into faith”, and the final seduction into “the unknown” (cited by Anderson 1999, p. 613). Therefore, it is clearly seen that Katz develops his suggestions referring to phenomenological realities and social constructivism theory.   Labeling theory in the modern context  Moreover, it should be noted that in terms of globalization, a crime commitment is usually assigned to an individual on the basis of social perverted stereotypes, such as ethnic peculiarities, nationality etc.   For example, black men are often accused of crimes they did not even commit. They are accused only because they have black color of skin, notwithstanding that racial discrimination is proved to be negative phenomenon. In accordance with another modern criminologist John Braithwaite (1989) he claimed that “social control should be named as shaming. There are two types of shaming. In terms of reintegrative shaming the offender is accepted by the society. In case of disintegrative shaming the offender is excluded from the society” (Braithwaite, 1989). Basically, the offenders are branded as criminals and they are considered by the society as life-long offenders. We seldom think about their destiny and about if they are guilty or not. We just label them forever not considering that many of them are simply innocent and some of them are very sorry of the crime committed. The main contribution of labeling theory in the criminology may be considered the following terminology: when we speak about deinstitutionalization, we refer to a process of removal of juveniles from jails, detention centers (Siegel, 2004). Moreover, terminology of labeling theory is often based on the describing of principles directed on removal of “the stigma of formal delinquent or criminal labels on the individuals and to reduce or avoid the costs of formal processing of the crime.” (Siegel 2004, p. 36). This point is of crucial importance in the modern society. Very often modern societies want to save their money and the introduction of diversion practices will save the governmental money. For this purpose, there are different social programs developed both on the local and national levels. Thus, Faith-Based Programs are religiously based programs directed on change of offenders’ system of beliefs and change of behavior. Labeling theory discussion As far as we can see, the importance of the labeling theory can be found in its focus on correction principles used for offenders’ behaviors change or a change of the system of beliefs. Moreover, we cannot deny the fact that social perverted stereotypes and beliefs often result in assigning certain labels to offenders. The society does not give criminal a chance to change, it simply labels him instead and forces to continue to commit crimes. There are certain deviant labels applied for criminals, who showed deviant behavior several times. Even after the first time of deviant behavior, the offender can be labeled as a criminal. The result of the second deviant behavior occurrence can be explained by social labeling of the offender as the criminal. It is also claimed in terms of the labeling theory that further crimes committed by the offender occur in the result of negative behavioral features assigned to the offender by the society (Braithwaite, 1989). In other words, the members of the society assign to the offender his further potential deviant behavior. The main advantage and unique feature of the labeling theory is that it does not make an attempt “to understand why an individual committed a crime in the first place. The labeling theorist wants to understand what happens after an individual is caught committing a crime, and society attaches a label to the offender.” (Garland and Sparks 2000, p.190). Therefore, we can claim that this theory gives an unusual interpretation of the nature of deviant behavior in comparison with other criminological theories. Still, there is an evident influence of social constructivism exerted on the development of labeling theory. Conclusion It should be noted that in the modern context it is appropriate to consider a process of crime commitment and potential crime occurrence as the result of templates of social behaviors. Moreover, the principles of the theory underline a crucial role of the society and its influence on the individual. This emphasis is relevant not only in the context of criminology, but also in the context of the modern global world. Labeling theory considers the offender from different points of view: on the one hand it assigns a passive role to him in his potential commitment of crime; on the other hand, this theory considers possibilities and potential corrections of a criminal’s deviant behavior. Thus this theory is very important for modern society and should be considered as worth-studying and discussing by scholars and applying by lawyers. Works cited 1. Anderson, D.A. (1999). The aggregate burden of crime. Journal of Law and Economics, 42, pp. 611–642. 2. Arvanites, T. (1992). The mental health and criminal justice system: Complementary forms of coercive control. In A. Liska (Ed.) Social threat and social control (pp. 131-150). Albany: SUNY Press. 3. Biglan, A. (1995). Translating what we know about the context of antisocial behavior into a lower prevalence of such behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, pp. 479–492. 4. Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, Shame and Reintegration. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. 5. Clarke, E. J. Deviant Behavior (A text-reader in the sociology of deviance). 7th ed. 6. Garland, D. and Sparks, R. (2000). Criminology, social theory and the challenge of our times. British Journal of Criminology, 40(2), pp. 189-204. 7. Siegel, L. (2004). Criminology: Theories, Patterns, & Typologies, 8e. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Read More