The Functionalist School of Criminology - Essay Example

? The Functionalist School of Criminology Introduction The functionalist school of criminology is the branch of sociology that deals with the functionalist perspective (also functionalism), which is one of the main theoretical perspectives of sociology. This theoretical perspective derives its origin from the works of one Emile Durkheim, a sociology who had much interest in finding out how social order is achievable, and how to achieve social stability. In trying to achieve an understanding of the role society plays to acquire social stability, functionalism splits society into many constituent parts, and defines what role each part contributes to the cause. Concisely, functionalism argues that society is not the sum of its parts, but rather every constituent part of society defines it because each has some effect on the overall society, and that all these parts rely on each other. The application of this argument is as follows: a state provides education for children coming from a family. The family obviously pays taxes to the state, taxes that the government runs on. Here, the family relies on the state to educate the children so they grow up to support families of their own. If these children do not break the law, they start producing and supporting the state as well. Such a cycle brings about stability in society. However, if at any one point the above order is interrupted, it breaches norms, meaning crime or deviant behaviour occurs. This in turn forces certain constituent parts of society to adjust and adapt in restoring productivity, stability, and order. Greek (2005) explains that similarly to various other sociological models like conflict theory, functionalist perspectives deal with crime implications and control policies, trying to ascertain the reasons behind criminal actions. Functionalism however does not shift the responsibility from offenders but rather pushes for appropriate sanctions and repressing criminal activities. Greek adds that functionalism has in some instances positive view of some deviant behaviours, and that ordinary crime does not threaten social order, but society cannot function properly without criminal behaviour and the responses that come with it. Crime, as Greek reveals, is an indicator of well-being in the social order, although too high levels of it indicate certain problems such as an increase in anomic conditions. When crime occurs, the society responds negatively, and from that, the people know the boundaries of behaviour that is acceptable. To him, crime is, and forms part of all social systems in existence. Emile Durkheim conducted studies on suicide and later came to present his findings that suicide is more of a social factor than it is an individual one. Contrary to the negative perception that suicide often receives, Durkheim defends suicide in his definition of it as “any case of death caused by a direct or indirect negative or positive act by the one committing it, who obviously knows the result.” In his studies, he came up with facts about suicide such as it varies with place and time. According to Durkheim, there is a possibility that all suicides occur only if there is an instance of insanity in the victim. Evidence of mental alienation appears in most of the cases of suicides, alienists claim, and to better understand this, they classified all cases of suicide as per their way of occurrence. One, there is maniacal suicide, which occurs due to delirious conceptions or hallucinating, that is, the victim commits it so as to try and escape from some imaginary disgrace or danger, or in another instance, to obey orders from a mysterious “highness.” Then there is melancholy suicide that comes from exaggerated sadness and depression, which causes the victim to lose sense of any bonds connecting them to people and his belongings. In short, everything in life appears boring and painful, both of which are chronic feelings that lead to thoughts of suicide. This self-destruction is gradual, and builds over time. Thirdly, there is an obsessive type of suicide that as is with the name, is purely imaginary, with no motive at all. However, the urge to destroy one’s life constantly lingers in their minds. This type of suicide is also known as anxiety-suicide. Lastly, there is impulsive or automatic suicide, which is usually unmotivated but happens spontaneously without intent or warning. Studies say victims of this kind of suicide attempts usually act abruptly and immediately with an irresistible impulse (Durkheim, 1951). From these observations; Durkheim summarizes the social causes of suicide as follows: 1) There is anomic suicide that results from an individual’s exposure to societal disintegrating forces, which make them live in solitude and feel lost. The most common is teenage suicide, suicide committed by individuals born to alcoholic parents, and those abused sexually when young. 2) Altruistic suicide results from excessive regulation of someone by societal forces. This kind of suicide can happen to favour a political or religious obligation. A good example is the 9/11 suicide bombers who took their lives and those of others to fulfil Jihad or “holy war.” 3) The last societal catalyst of suicide is egoistic suicide. This happens when someone lacks the feeling of belonging to society. This is someone who due to some factors in society lacks social bonds to the community and family. This type of suicide mostly haunts the aged who after becoming weak or retiring from work risk feeling worthless, therefore turn to egoistic suicide (Crossman, 2013). Anomie is another major aspect of study in the functionalist school of criminology that works to define the causes of crime in society. Anomie is the lack of the proper norms in a society. Two theories try to define how anomie leads to deviant behaviour: the first theory is Emile Durkheim’s, which says that as the society evolves from a non-specialized, simple form (mechanical) to a more specialized and complex form (organic) that requires people to achieve certain goals, then the bonds of society that tie people together break. This means there are no norms anymore to control the behaviour and performance of the people in society. The result of this is therefore dissatisfaction in some, conflicts, and deviance. According to Durkheim, a period of social disruption such as an economic depression is likely to bring great anomie, as well as increasing the rates of deviance, suicide, and crime. The second anomie theory is by Robert Merton, also called the strain or means-end theory. It is as famous as Durkheim’s, and explains that biology is in no way accountable for the variations from a society to the other by defining several biological explanations of deviance. His theory focuses not on an individual deviation, but on a rather collective term as to why deviance rates differ so differently across societies and small sub-groups within one society. Merton’s theory however borrows a leaf from Durkheim’s in that both theories concur that anomie is the breakdown of norms that regulate society, and occurs due to rapid changes. Merton however explains that anomic suicide can occur due to both economic depression and economic boom as well. He explains this because when the economy hits sky-high’s, it is hard for individuals to limit their goals as well as have satisfaction from their achievements. Merton’s theory blames anomie for the increase in deviant behaviour, particularly in the United States more than in any other society globally. In addition, the rate of deviant behaviour differs according to an individual’s ethnicity, race, class, and other such factors. He explains that in the United States, money represents success and that everyone in that society is emphasized on monetary success and for those who seem to scale back on their goals, they earn the title of quitters. This is not to imply that hard work and ambition do not matter because they apply at workplaces and in school as well. What this means is that there are individuals in society who embrace rogue or inappropriate means of achieving success, creating the impression that success is more important than virtue in the American society. Merton’s study of anomie and deviant behaviour concludes that people, when facing crossroads when it comes to finding means and achieving goals come up with various adaptations (umn.edu). The possible adaptations that they are likely to take to include: 1) Conformity, which is accepting the society’s set goals and following the acceptable means of achieving them. 2) Innovation, which is the reaction due to pressure accumulating from society’s emphasis on success, and which usually, pushes people to innovate in socially unacceptable means of achieving the success. 3) The rebellion, which is a rejection of both society’s goals and means, and in turn replacing them with one’s preferred goals and means, usually through breaking the rules. 4) Ritualism, which is the incapacity to reach a goal, set by culture, which makes one hold on to the acceptable rules until they lose track of other bigger goals. A ritualist rejects the goals of society, but accepts the means of achieving them. 5) Retreatism, which is rejecting both the means and goals, which in turn places the retreats always in the wrong, as their acts are always wholly deviant. Marshall (1964) reveals that deviant behaviour is not specific, and that what is deviant to one person might not be deviant to another. To bring out the notion of deviant behaviour as hard to brand as either right or wrong, he introduces a scenario in 2002 in Lima, Peru where some surgeons were buying body organs such as the kidneys, and rewarding the donors handsomely. It is illegal to conduct organ transplants as a business in almost every state in the world, so this act was illegal. However looking on the other side of it, the donors receive “compensation”, and in addition, the organs go to hospitals where they save lives of others who rely on organ donations to survive. In sociology, deviance is any act that breaches acceptable social norms. In the given situation, it is possible that while some people embrace the buying and selling of organs, others see it as deviant. Today, there are behaviours that seem too obvious to qualify as deviant but surprisingly, disagreements arise, in defence of them as not being deviant. For instance, some behaviour such as alcoholism, suicide, crime, and homosexuality from an outward glance appear unacceptable, but in today’s world, people will come out in public to defend them, or even go to court so they have the freedom to practice them. Sociology’s interest in studying the idea of deviance began in the early 1950’s, and the sociologists in it try to discover what contributes to a behaviour being deviant, the nature of a deviant act, what it takes one to commit a deviant act, and what the implications are of committing such an act. Since there are so many norms in existence that are prone to violation, there are also very many forms of deviant acts. In the study of deviance, there exist other theories apart from the Anomie theory, only different in that they do not contain as much depth of studies as the Anomie. Cliffsnotes (2013) summarizes them as follows: The differential-association theory This theory is by Edwin Sutherland, and addresses the issues of how one comes to learn deviance. According to him, the environment is paramount in determining the norms that people are likely to violate: that is, people in a particular social group provide deviance and the norms of conformity, largely influencing how others look at the world, and their reactions. Concisely, people learn deviant acts such as crime from those they relate closely with, be it parents, co-workers, friends, or the media. Control theory This theory by Walter Reckless argues that the inner, as well as the outer controls of a person contribute against deviance. In some instances, a person has the urge to act in a deviant manner, but their inner controls such as morality, integrity, or conscience restrains them from their intentions. Outer controls such as religious regulations, family, police and the law from the outer restraints of deviant behaviour. The labelling theory This theory, which gives an understanding as close to the Anomie of deviance, explains that something becomes deviant after the people in a society label it as deviant. This theory studies, who labels, who is labelled, why this happens, and the consequences of labelling someone. This means that a powerful person in society such as politicians, judges, or doctors can easily impose a label on someone. The possible labels include thief, prostitute, drug addict, delinquent, retard, and so on. The consequences of labelling someone include damaging one’s self-image, self-rejection, and worse still; it can lead to the individual acting in ways that are more deviant. Conclusion In summing up, it is important to understand the importance of functionalist concerning sociology, which it is a branch under. One, it is possible to draw a line between what is acceptable and not, and what consequences follow breaching the acceptable. Second, when a certain issue comes up and arouses the contradiction of whether it is acceptable or not, it causes a debate that discusses the issue, resulting in better understanding of it. This aspect of understanding and in turn causes bonding in the society (Downes & Rock, 1999). Finally, functionalism helps to suggest when a certain aspect of society is not auguring well, that is, when a certain matter stirs a calm society, it is obvious that some deviant act is happening somewhere, giving those responsible for the neutralization of such prior knowledge to curb the matter. References CliffsNotes. (2013). Theories of Deviance. Retrieved on December 10, 2013 from http://www.cliffsnotes.com/sciences/sociology/deviance-crime-and-social-control/theories-of-deviance Crossman, A. (2013). The Study of Suicide. Sociology.about.com. Retrieved on December 10, 2013 from http://sociology.about.com/od/Works/a/Suicide.htm Downes, & Rock. (1995). Deviance: Functionalist Explanations. Retrieved on December 10, 2013 from http://www.sociology.org.uk/pcfcri95.pdf Durkheim, E. (1951). Suicide: A Study in Sociology. New York: Free Press. Greek, C. (2005, November 22). Functionalist Explanations of Crime. Criminology.fsu.edu. Retrieved on December 10, 2013 from http://criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/week7.htm Marshall, C. (1964). Anomie and Deviant Behavior. New York: The Free Press. Umn.edu. Robert Merton: Anomie Theory. Retrieved on December 10, 2013 from http://www.d.umn.edu/~bmork/2306/Theories/BAManomie.htm Read More