Antisocial Behaviours vs Invisible Socially Disadvantaged - Literature review Example

Antisocial Behaviours Vs Invisible Socially Disadvantaged Antisocial Behaviours Vs Invisible Socially Disadvantaged The uniqueness of any society is how different components work together for its benefits. A major concern is how these characters combine to form a sustainable society. There is a contrast in opinion on whether to concentrate on the positive effect of the characters or a combined effort to ensure the negative energy within the society is worked on. Major concern for each society is on how to work on both the antisocial behaviours within the society and how to cater for the marginalized within society. The leadership in each society works on formalities to ensure a balance between core requirements in society. It is up to the authority to strike a balance between policing of antisocial behaviours and the marginalization of invisible socially disadvantaged groups. The balance between the two concept works as a means of bridging societal gaps. There is a link between the social disparities and antisocial behaviours and an effort to ensure a social balance is inevitable by any authority within a society. Antisocial behaviours within any society are triggered by environmental factors. The surroundings within a community may harbour these behaviours or offer a solution to these problems. Patterson et al. (1990) describe a family setup as the core unit in which behaviours can be taught. Learning a certain concept in society will depend on limits set by a given culture within society. The impact of antisocial behaviours towards the rest of the society is evident on the manner in which society reacts to the behaviour. Aggressiveness will mean society reacts aggressively and rejects the behaviours. The negative impact of behaviours towards society is what creates social disadvantages within the society (The Home Office, 2011). The correlation between antisocial behaviours and social disadvantage is evident when a given society reacts to behaviour on grounds that they are protection the natural composition of the same society. Society plays part in dealing with antisocial behaviour by advocating the inclusiveness in matters decision making. The ancient assumption of age and antisocial behaviours has been the ongoing of the initiatives. This means that individuals regardless of their age are capable of engaging in antisocial behaviours. Those engaged in antisocial behaviours should be dealt with individual rather than ignoring them due to the assumption that their impact is minimal. The propelling nature of these behaviours to the young generations can be linked directly to the ignorance the society and government give while initiating policies (Prior & Paris, 2005). Excluding a certain component within a society is what worsens the efforts by different agencies to find a balance between social disadvantage and antisocial behaviours. Those left out by government policies will find alternatives in antisocial behaviours. An important aspect of this argument is finding the sense of solving social disadvantages among groups within a society. Dissatisfaction among groups in society calumniate into violence ant antisocial behaviours. The reason behind antisocial behaviours among sections of the society is linked directly to the unsatisfactory nature of society (The Home Office, 2011). The society needs to create resources that are accessible to all and allow room for those who less privileged to assess alternatives. The local authority failures to create these alternatives will prompt a given section within society to resist. Antisocial behaviours are an outcome of sections of the community resisting a given aspect in the community. Authorities within society then are faced with a dilemma on whether to solve the societal differences or create a mechanism in which to deal with antisocial behaviours. The most affected group within a society is the youth and the children within society (Walker & Donaldson, 2010). The group inherits societal disadvantages from the older generation thus a series of antisocial behaviours would be experienced from the marginalised groups over a longer period. Factors that facilitate antisocial behaviour should be managed at different levels. Communities combine efforts to ensure these behaviours do not influence the manner in which societies are governed. The initiative to control this behaviour is essential to facilitate the development. Part of the initiative is to engage those involved in the antisocial behaviours and ensuring that they those involved in these activities are assisted. Different organs are mandated to control these behaviours. Solving antisocial behaviours among members of a given society means creating an environment where each unit of within the society works independently and effectively to avert the social problems (Vici, 2012). The societys full potential would be realised once each unit within the community works accordingly. Parts of the problems within a society are triggered by internal components thus different organs should identify these units to create a formidable force that will be geared towards community development. Those engaged in antisocial behaviours are subjected to a number of programs that will correct the behaviour and prevent the society from negatively influencing the young generation (Walker & Donaldson, 2010). The police are an integral unit to local authorities in ensuring the society is managed based on morals and a number of efforts rather than negative energies developed by antisocial activities. The police collaborate with the society in accepting antisocial behaviours. This ensures these behaviours are managed at their initial stages. Those involved are mandated to engage them fully and formulate models that will ensure they improve their social behaviours. The identification of problems within a society aids the community in enhancing development agenda. The community groups are used to identify those engaged in antisocial behaviours. The identification process is integral as the police use it in planning strategically for community initiatives. Police ensure these behaviours do not recur. The major concern among policy makers is how to ensure policies made are effective and can be applied in different environments. The police use set policies to facilitate their agendas (Mulcahy, & O’Mahony, 2005). Societies thus engage police in ensuring a safer society that works in ensuring a development. The police apply various components including fines and court actions. The hefty penalties for criminal and other violent activities are gears towards discouraging other members of society in engaging in them. The local authorities depend on the police in ensuring antisocial behaviours are dealt with. The government then focuses on ensuring development agenda is initiated. Development in this case means bridging social classes and allowing equal access to resources. The educator plays a role in ensuring the government realises its development agenda through social parity. McCarthy et al. (2003) advocates area based initiative in ensuring community development. This implies that the government dived policies in two sections. The high- level policies that aim at judging the efforts put in place by the central government in ensuring equity in resource allocation and utilization. The low-level policies include collaborating with different units within which social equality will be identified. The structure of any administration should be able to facilitate service delivery to community members. Those barriers should be worked upon based on units within the community. Effective service delivery will be essential in ensuring available resources are channelled towards community development. The government initiative towards poverty reduction can be outlined as one among efforts to bridge the social gaps. Ife (2013) identifies the government welfare programs as part of local authoritys effort to bridge the gaps that exist within society. Through different regulations and laws, the government directly associate with various units in society to identify the social requirements and work on them in an effort to ensure a sustainable environment. Alcock (2008) describes how social policies within different society in the country have enabled the country to identify challenges within the society. The main concern of the government is to deal with marginalized groups and integrate them into plans that will improve their lives. The main concern of the United Kingdom government is how to enhance social parity by reducing levels of poverty. Concentrating on poverty reduction while ignoring the plights of the marginalized groups would be devastating to any authority a balance should be in place to ensure the entire spectrum is worked upon. Community development entails making social amenities available to all members in society. The focus of any given government is to concentrate on social disadvantages and manage them effectively through various means. The society is then segmented according to the needs if various groups (Barnardos, 2004). Initiatives by government and other social groups to empowered different groups in society are essential towards community development. Community development programs concentrate in empowering each society by identifying individuals among this society. Identification implies that empowering individuals rather than groups with society. The efforts by each government are to engage community members in facilitating development. Combined efforts by local and international institutions facilitate government initiatives in ensuring social parity. The community growth initiative is enhanced by creating an opportunity both locally and internationally for members of a given society. Economic growth is part of the international efforts of ensuring community growth and development (Nickell, 2006.). Members of a given society directly involve themselves in economic activities thus generating revenue that would ensure they improve their living standards. The society then creates an environment where each member within the community depends on each other. This effort then reduces the chances of social exclusiveness, as each member will be capable of contributing to the development of the community. Creating a market for goods produced by a given community will ensure that each unit benefits from the global initiative. Those who are unable to access the market are then empowered and given alternatives thus contributing towards community development. Community development is enhanced once individuals are salvaged from their traditional cocoons. This negative energy within a certain community can be worked upon to facilitate change within society. The change is what creates a suitable environment in which the government through local agency can drive their development agenda. Members in a given society combine efforts to ensure development within the community. The government then should target these efforts and use them towards drafting their economic plans. This plan in most cases only benefits a few. Those unsatisfied seek refuge to community groups. The groups then empower them towards sustainable development. Those who fail to use these groups engage themselves in violent activities and other forms of antisocial behaviours. These actions to them acts as an alternative to access resources denied to them by the community and the government. Government efforts should involve community groups as they play an integral role in ensuring different components in society are dealt with. Members of community development groups should strategize their plans based on facts rather than personal interests. The groups should enhance government initiatives and source funds from various components to enhance these initiatives. The local government being an integral unit of society collaborates with these community groups to ensure development agendas are initiated at the lowest level the society. Empowered community will mean a leeway towards sustainable development. Davies (2009) describes the role of the community in matters political supremacy. The stability of the community is essential, and local authorities are mandated in ensuring the community realises the goals. The collective responsibility by government and other community partners is what enhances realisation of gender and other social parties. Focusing on the children the best approach is engaging parents and other local authorities in planning policies that will minimize their involvement in crime and other violent activities. Environmental factors in this case involve level of poverty and political influences. Davies (2009) describes social, economic and political environments that will enhance youth empowerment and child protection from activities that would otherwise trigger their involvement in antisocial behaviours. Creating a suitable environment involves managing antisocial behaviours among adult thus limiting the changes of the activities being adapted by children. Children in this case represent the future. Community development agendas will be pushed by clearly understanding the future environments. Efforts to manage antisocial behaviour should be a combined effort by parents, social organs and the government. The environment in which children adapt antisocial behaviour can be transformed through empowerment and sensitization initiatives. The social responsibility of the government in matters development is what drives the government in initiating programs that promote sustainability. Educators within society collaborate with the government in ensuring a smooth process in which the society operates. They are then assigned the duty of ensuring the society is enlighten on matters that will enhance their development by eradicating social disadvantages. The children are used in most cases as they are an integral part in the future of any organisation. The society develops itself based on the economic and political nature of its organs (Huntinton, S. 2006). The government encourage each unit to play a part in ensuring sustainable development. Most appreciate development by encouraging others towards positive social behaviours. The minority that resist the move are selected and assigned programs that are aimed at improving their social interaction. The inclusiveness of the sustainable programs will enable community initiatives trace antisocial behaviours and at the same time predict the environments that would trigger the behaviour in children and the young population (Henderson & Thomas, 2001) Different governments design programs effectively involves the local community in programs. The programs reduce conflict that could arise if the government engaged directly with the locals. The community groups and the local government identifies social problems and proposes the same to the national government who designs measures to control antisocial behaviour while at the same time bridge the gaps created by society. Bridging social gaps will mean community empowerment and development. Inclusiveness of all units within a society is essential in ensuring a future environment that limits its self in development thus channelling resources towards community development. These resources are those that would otherwise be used in controlling antisocial behaviours (Packham, 2000). On a wider scale, local authorities should engage locals in ensuring antisocial behaviours are dealt with within certain parameters. Different programs in society have been developed with the aim of ensuring social balance. The social claas3s within a community are what creates the disadvantages within a society. A society is a unit where different classes within a community share various factors. Cultural differences are visible along the social classes. In a society where the gap between social classes is big, the elite tend to dictate the manner in which another member within society operates. The dominant nature of the elite within a society creates a negative atmosphere within a given a community. The high in society dominant social issues and politically influence other members in society. The major concern with the group is how their influence will affect the community. The reception by other members of society is essential in that it will determine whether the community will unit or will create ideological differences. Leadership within the community should focus on ensuring the gaps within the social classes are closed. Community development programs are government initiatives in bridging the gap between the elite and the peripherals with a society. Community development involves identifying the elite and the intellectuals and uses them to create an improved society through various initiatives. The main aim of developmmnet initiatives is to create awareness for the different section within society. These initiatives include female empowerment programs. The effort is to create gender parity and create an atmosphere where all genders access resources equality. The economic gap created by gender exclusiveness should be focused upon by any local authorities in ensuring development is realised based on goals set by government. Authority focuses in ensure its policies are geared towards creating a sustainable environment. Social disparities should be worked upon based on various factors within society. The government should then arrange its priorities based community sustainability and service deliveries. Sustainability involves identifying the dangers that social exclusiveness causes to the development (Warwick-booth, 2013). This means that identifying the children and venerable groups within the community and working with them to ensure improvement. Working with the marginalised would reduce the psychological effects caused to any group because of dissatisfaction and limited access to resources (UNDP, 2010). The government then focus in incentives that will enhance the manner in which social groups cooperate with local authorities in ensuring parity between members in the community. Social parity will mean that collective efforts are in place to ensure sustainable growth within the community. The balance between social disadvantages and antisocial behaviours can be explained more on how the society operates without the involvement of external factors (Warwick-booth, 2013). The involvement of the national government is to ensure different communities operate within the same level as aligned in governments effort to ensure community development. The participation of different units within the community is essential in realising the fairness and social justice as part of community works. Development within a community is essential as it describes how the governments policies are affected in different scenarios. The government regulations limit the involvement of different organs in dictating the nature in which society develops and operates (Pierson, 2009). The inclusion of educators in community initiatives acts as effectively in ensuring sustainability within the community. Empowerment breaks the social barrier caused by stereotypes and inferiority complex. Disadvantages within society could be worked upon once those excluded in matters development are recognised and enlighten on their responsibilities within the community (Pierson, 2009). The educators are tasked with ensuring the societies are in line with the government policies. The government then can work on the environment that is awareness of social responsibility. Identifying these environments will be critical to an educator and community worker who aims at finding a balance between societal opportunities and disadvantages. However, there is an argument on how a balance can be created between the two components that derail community development. The majority may be sued as determiners towards community development. The marginalised in some cases have minimal effect towards the development of the community hence policies may be enacted neglecting the groups (UNDP, 2010). The government then in some case engages in stringent measures deal with the antisocial behaviours rather than engage them in a diplomatic manner. Political interests in some cases have been used as an excuse towards marginalizing communities. These communities are then used by politician to ascend to power. Community initiatives are then discouraged from engaging directly with the society in empowering communities. The social impact of would be evident once the society resists the authority on grounds that existing policies are oppressive. The oppressive nature of some policies is the difference between community development and social disparities. The elite control the society while the minority plays a spectator role. In conclusion, the government and other community work groups should work together in ensuring a sustainable environment. Creating this type of environments means that working on disparities within communities and identifying factors that trigger antisocial behaviour. These factors are what discourage community development. Resources are channelled in solving antisocial behaviours rather than on development agendas. The community creates grounds in which various policies can operate to ensures sustainability within the community. The community allows social engagement and collaboration of different units in ensuring a suitable environment. The marginalised in this case fight for equity within society and engage in activities that will guarantee their survival. The failure by these groups to identify the social position leads to resistance in a form of antisocial behaviour. The government thus faces the dilemma to balance between these behaviours and the positions of these organs within the community. The community and other organs have a role to play towards community development, but it is up to the authority to strike a balance between policing of antisocial behaviours and the marginalization of invisible socially disadvantaged groups. The exclusive nature of policies may the reason behind failed communities. The social classes should then act as a leeway towards development rather than being used as an avenue to oppress groups within the society. Reference Alcock , P.2008.Social Policy in Britain. New Jersey: Palgrave Macmillan Barnardos .2004. Community Profiling. Available at: [Accessed 15 December 2014]. Cheema, S.2011.Engaging Civil Society to Promote Democratic Local Governance: Emerging Trends and Policy Implications in Asia. [Online]. Available at: [Accessed 15 December 2014] Davies, O. 2009. Community Development, Politics, Policy & Practice. London: UEL Henderson, P. & Thomas, D.2001. Skills in Neighbourhood Work. London: Routledge. Huntinton, S. 2006.Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven: Yale University Press Ife, J. 2013.Community Development in an Uncertain World. New York: Cambridge University Press. McCarthy, P., Whitman, J. & Coombes, M.2003.Targeting Initiatives: Diverting Children and Young People from Crime and Antisocial Behaviour. Newcastle: University of Newcastle Mulcahy, A., & O’Mahony, E. 2005.Policing and Social Marginalisation in Ireland. Poverty research initiative. [Online]. Available at: [Accessed 15 December 2014]. Neumark, T. . Engaging with communities: lesson from the Frontline. London: Community Development Foundation Nickell, S. 2006.The Budget of 1981 was over the top. London Institute of Economic Affairs Panel Discussion, London. Institute of Economic Affairs London. Available at : [Accessed 15 December 2014]. Packham, C .2000. Community Auditing. Appropriate research methods for effective youth and community intervention in Humphries B (ed) Research in Social Care and Social Welfare. London, Routledge 102-118 Patterson, G., DeBaryshe, B., & Ramsey, E. !990. A developmental pwespective on antisciola behaviour. American Psychology, 44: pp 329 -335. Pierson, J. 2009.Tackling Social Exclusion. London: Routledge. Prior, D & Paris, A. 2005.Preventing Children’s Involvement in Crime and Anti-Social Behaviour: A literature Review. Newcastle: University of Newcastle The Home Office (2011) Anti-social behaviour orders. [Online] Available at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/ [Accessed 15 December 2014]. UNDP. 2010.Marginalised minorities in developing programming. UNEP. [online]. Available at: [Accessed 15 December 2014]. Vici , A.2012.The Inbetweeners: Young people making sense of youth anti-social behavior. Durham University. [online]. Available at: [Accessed 15 December 2014]. Walker, J., & Donaldson, C. 2010Improve Outcomes for Vulnerable young people: A review of the evidence. [online] available at: [Accessed 15 December 2014]. Warwick-booth, B. 2013.Social Policy: An Introduction. New York:McGraw-Hill International. Read More