Interventions to Combat Anti-social Behaviour - Essay Example

Heading: Interventions to combat Anti-social behaviour Your name: Course name: Professors’ name: Date Introduction One of the major causes of criminal activities in Australia is increased rates of anti-social behaviours especially by the youth. Anti-social behaviour breeds evil activities that stagnates the country’s economy as well as disturbing the peace and mutual co-existence among the residents of a place. Traditional juvenile justice tried to mitigate the escalation of criminal activities by locking offenders in jails. This paper however shades more light on the interventions established the NSW to fight against anti- social behaviour as well through establishment of government functions focused on eliminating this social evil. Major issues about the interventions have will also be closely examined in order to highlight the strengths and the weaknesses of the system functionality. This will be particularly imperative is proposing an alternative approach for reducing antisocial behaviours. The proposed strategy is thus based on the research and findings of the genesis of the problem which helps in giving a compounded and fundamental approach to the issue. Interventions established in NSW to combat anti-social behaviour The NSW state has plans which essentially give the first priority measures of mitigating anti- social behaviour (Osmond 2010). Despite the fact that several cases related to crime are on the decline in Australia, minority people are still causing disruption of the normal activities in the community a factor that affects the peaceful co-existence of the community. As stated by Osmond (2010, p.330), the Anti-Social Behavior Pilot Project (ASBPP) was established in the year 2006 with the primary purpose of identifying and analysing young people who pose a threat to the society and to themselves. Its other mandate was also to ensure that there is a sustainable development and implementation platform capable of preventing any criminal activity. In order to ensure a successful system, this framework also ensures that the justice public and the human service are exempted from privacy laws with an aim of enabling an efficient sharing of information related to risks of young people (Squires 2005). The incorporation of the intensive and multi-agency management approach of risks also adds to the strategies set in place to reduce criminal activities that anti- social behaviour generates. According to Osmond (2010, p.333) this framework is part of the NSW Government Crime Prevention Framework which is tasked with the functions of developing a strategic approach that targets crime prevention among the young people. A strategic partnership between the ASBPP and the Crime prevention also includes the community the business fraternity and other government agencies. This strategic crime prevention partnership is managed and coordinated by the Crime Prevention Steering Group which is a central government under the office of the premier and the cabinet. The premier and the cabinet office are mandated the tasks of ensuring the activities between the agencies responsible for crime prevention are managed well (Department of Premier and Cabinet 2009). These partners are accountable for indentifying and providing information related to potential crime targets. The ASBPP operations use a nodal technique which disseminates risk related information in the region. The ASBPP thus forms a wide network topology field which ensures that there is an interchangeable system of security. According to Brown (2004) the Youth Conduct Orders (YCO) created under the Young Offenders Act of 1997 also plays an important part in reducing anti-social behaviours by subjecting young offenders to compulsory actions such as visiting the doctor, visiting the counsellors and avoiding certain negative companies. The YCO seeks to reduce the negative actions of the youth who plead guilty to anti-social behaviour or are charged with anti-social behaviour (Crawford 2009). Major issues and concerns about the interventions According to Osmond (2010) as noted by the analysis of the government supported program ASBPP, the core functions of the system is to determine possible criminal activities through strategic partnership and community, government agencies and business groups’ involvement. As far as mitigating crimes at their infancy stages, the ASBPP and the crime prevention project works well. The major issue however is the fact that the core problems leading to criminal activities are not addressed and thus suppressing but not eliminated anti-social behaviour. The ASBPP is confined to the rationalities and government techniques that consist of surveillant and inter-assemblage segments which fail to consider other aspects that could be the cause of increased criminal activities such as poor education, lack of proper guidance and so forth (Osmond 2010). Research reveals that the primary focus of crime prevention process should be based on the root cause of the problem. Handling the root cause of the problem will be more effective as compared to prevention strategies that have been instituted by the ASBPP and other government agencies (Ramsay 2004). Prevention of criminal and other anti-social behaviours should be addressed from the primary source of the problem. Issues affecting the youth such as un-employment, poor grades in school and segregation as experienced by the aborigines should be considered in order to mitigate the problems that the young people face. Preventive measures fostered by the ASBPPP are not sufficient to curb the problem of criminal activities and other anti-social behaviours among the youth (Ramsay 2004). According to Staats (2008) the Youth Conduct Orders (YCO) on the other hand neglects the voices of the youth and instead increases marginalization and interference with these young people’s space. These strategies luck basic understanding that restricting the youth from doing certain activities will actually stop them. Young people need love appreciation guidance and not restrictive measures that result in moral panics. The traditional concept of criminal justice has been largely altered by the development of strategic plan to monitor criminal activities within Australia. This is because the fundamental functions juvenile crime justice was to take into custody juvenile criminal offenders and try them in their courts before sending them to prisons to serve their sentence (Millie 2008). The strategies used by the ASBPP have created a different platform for juvenile criminal handling process where the major issue is the prevention of potential risk through risk management process (Millie 2008). Alternative approaches of reducing levels of anti-social behaviour Analysis of the core cause of criminal activities and anti-social activities is generates the fundamental platform of setting up strategies able to mitigate this social problem. According to Weatherburn (2004, p. 188) the performance levels of students in school is related with the rate of criminal activities in Australia. In the past three decades the level of crime was down because of the even distribution and general low regard towards education coupled with cultural practices that affected the especially the Australian aborigines (Roger 2008). In the past decade, students who perform well in their education had better chances of securing employment while the students with low grades found it hard to secure a significant employment opportunity. Failure to secure a sound employment opportunity leads to life related stresses that particularly affect these young people with low grades. Employment opportunities that they can only secure are low paying and not temporary (Roger 2008). It is at this stage that these young people begin to lose hope, feel rejected and under achievers and thus leading them to indulge in criminal activities that breed a generation of criminal gangs within a given region (Simester 2006). Based on my own view, moral panics and other anti-social behaviours such as loud hooting and increased noise making in the neighbourhood is as a result of lacking strategies of addressing problems that the youth face. The modern day youths are neglected, they are marginalised, and nobody gives them attention that is necessary as they mature into adulthood. Taking up the youth’s space and subjecting them to oppressive regulations of the YCO does not have any positive contribution to the reduction of anti-social behaviour. Sympathetic approaches ought to be established in order to address the core reason that contributes to increased anti-social behaviours among the youth (Martin 2011). More parental guidance, youth involvement, and giving the youth adequate space by relaxing the regulations will have more positive contributions to the reduction of the anti-social behaviours. Based on the analysis of the fundamental reasons that contribute to the escalation of anti-social behaviours that generate criminal activities, a strategic approach that provides a workable alternative can thus be proposed. The government and other stakeholders should ensure that the level of education especially among the disadvantaged groups like the aborigines is clearly addressed. Improving the level of education among the young people will increase their chances of securing a career after school and hence avoiding indulgence on criminal activities and other forms of crime (Martin 2011). A research should also be conducted on ways of mitigating cultural and other social challenges that the aborigines face in order to enhance their educational foundation. This will lead to their integration with the white Australian community and therefore contributing to their well-being a factor that is critical in reducing the level of crime (Brown 2004, p.205. The government should also ensure that it creates opportunities for the youth in order for them to engage in income generating activities after they complete their education. The government should widen its scope by creating an environment that encourages self-employment. This can be done by providing young people with necessary informal education that prepares them to face future challenges and hence not indulging in anti-social behaviours. Conclusion This analysis has focused on the interventions that have been done by the government regarding management and mitigation of anti-social behaviours that range from moral panics, undesired behaviours such as binge drinking, unnecessary noises such as loud car hooting and even criminal activities. The ASBPP and the YCO are the government projects established in the NSW in order to combat the vice. The ASBPP objective is to circumvent anti-social behaviours from the start while YCO subjects the offenders to corrective measures through restricting actions. As pointed out, these interventions have not fully attained their core objectives because of the limited perception of the anti-social behaviours. A more sympathetic and understanding approach should be adopted in order to provide a lasting solution to the problem. Rules and regulations suppresses criminal actions but leaves other anti-social behaviours such as retrain from constructive activities in the society and over-indulgence in binge drinking, moral panics among other anti-social behaviours. The government should also improve educational standards and increase employment opportunities especially among the marginalized communities in order to provide a lasting solution to the youth’s anti-social behaviours. References Brown, B. (2004) ‘Anti-social behaviour, crime control and social control’, The Howard Journal, 43(2): 203-211. Crawford, A. (2009) ‘Governing through anti-social behaviour: Regulatory challenges to criminal justice’, British Journal of Criminology, 49: 810-831. Department of Premier and Cabinet (2009) Anti-social behaviour pilot project: Case co-ordination guidelines, Sydney: NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet. Martin, G. (2011) ‘Tackling ‘anti-social behaviour’ in Britain and New South Wales: A preliminary comparative account, Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 22(3): in press. Millie, A. 2008. ‘Anti-social behaviour, behavioural expectations and an urban aesthetic’, British Journal of Criminology, 48: 379-394. Osmond, C. (2010) ‘Anti-social behaviour and its surveillant inter-assemblage’, Surveillance and Society, 7(3/4): 325-343, Special Issue on Surveillance and Childhood, eds. V. Steeves and O. Jones. http://www.surveillance-and-society.org/ojs/index.php/journal/article/view/nsw/nsw Ramsay, P. 2004. ‘What is anti-social behaviour?’ Criminal Law Review, November: 908-925. Roger, J. (2008) Criminalising social policy: Anti-social behaviour and welfare in a de-civilised society, Collumpton: Willan. Simester, A.P. and von Hirsch, A. (2006) ‘Regulating offensive conduct through two-step prohibitions’, In A. von Hirsch and A.P. Simester (eds), Incivilities: Regulating offensive behaviour, Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp 517-528. Squires, P. and Stephen, D. (2005) ‘Rethinking ASBOs’, Critical Social Policy, 25(4): 517-528. Staats, N. (2008) ‘Youth conduct orders: Anti social or anti youth?’ Undercurrent, 1: 41-43. Weatherburn, D.J. (2004) Law and order in Australia: rhetoric and reality, Federation press. Sydney. Pp.184-199. Read More