Labeling Theory Of Deviance Essay

Various theories induce been indue forward to explain the causes of tallyense and delinquency in society. The Labelling scheme of wickedness argues that the tendency to perceive and treat people as offenders precipitates their engagement in offensive presentivity. It is based on the hypothesis that people lead assume the labels that they allow been inclined to them by the society. Labelling in this case works to reinforce aberrant behaviour as well as solidifying the deviant identities in the society. In other words labelling people as criminals plays a squ ar role in increasing or rather causing crime in the society. (Burke R,2005).As Tannenbaum, an early sociologist supporting the labelling theory of crime argued that the mathematical operation of tagging, defining, identifying, segregating, describing and emphasizing that trustworthy individualists as deserving special treatment is a way of stimulating, suggesting, suggesting and evoking the traits creation compla ined of makes people become what they be described as being. Symbolic interactionalism is based on the agency analysis of deviance and brotherly control. In this case deviance is viewed as a label which is impose on the subjects who later rejecting or accepting the labels construct deviant identities as well as c areers.To change such a situation the indigence for radical trans multifariousnessation is more(prenominal) of a necessity than a requirement. Labelling theory of crime can be blamed for the increased instances of crime as the criminal justice schema tries to curb it. People who are arrested, prosecuted and penalize are label as criminals and the society deems them as such. A grand proportion of the society excessively joins hands in labelling them as such and this increases their tendency to thwart in criminal behaviours.When people are labelled as criminals it is difficult for them to effectively adjust into the society and for instance they whitethorn fail to obtain legitimate employment, a factor that increases their likelihood to indulge in crime. (Burke R,2005). They may also face isolation from the mainstream society and this could set forth mental problems which are highly correlated to criminality. When the labelled criminals internalize the ego-importance concept that they are criminals they tend to increase criminality behaviours as after all they are perceived as criminals and should be establish as such.(Coser L, 2006). Offenders ought to be treated as sick characters to make it easier for the criminal justice system to offer best treatment for ease reintegration into the society. This way the stigmatization would be dealt with amicably. Labelling could occur from the society as a integral or the system, family, among peers as well as in schools from teachers. Labelling in crime tends to be more frequent or intense among the minority groups whose voice is almost peanut in society.How a society reacts after it has labelle d criminals is what determines if a crime is to dwindle or intensify. Societies that labels criminals and for a long term reject them in the society increases their likelihood to commit crime while the society that tries to look the labelled criminals to effectively integrate into the society reduces the rates of crime that could have been attributed by labelling. Erving Goff objet dart is among the sociologists whose ideologies could be useful in explaining the labeling theory of crime. He is favourite for the nonion of intact establishments.He defined core institutions as places of conformation and work where a large number of like-situated individuals are cut off from the wider society for an appreciable period of time. Together these people lead an enfold formally administered round of manner. Goffman further highlighted the discrepancies among those who reside in the fare institutions and those in the larger general population. In the larger population man works, pl ays and sleeps in varying places, with varying people, different authorities and in the absence of an overall rational plan.(Hawkins J and Kirkland F, 2001). This is contrary with the scenario in the total institutions where thither are barriers mingled with those three aspects. Life in the total institutions is actualise or definite and this creates the notion that they exist for a good dry land among the general population. There is no freedom in the total institutions as is experient in the house world or the general population. To Goffman the buncos being sent to prisons or total institutions already know the culture they are to expect though the reality is actually felt or experienced after admission.(Hawkins J and Kirkland F, 2001). Goffman identified three major(ip) phases in the life of an inmate. The first one is before they get into the total institutions that is when they are sedate in the floor world, when they in the institutions and when they re enter the home world after release from the total institutions. He focused on the similarities that exist in the varying institutions. He argues that all aspects of life are conducted in the aforementioned(prenominal) place and under the equal or a single authority. This means that all prisons will have similar experiences. whole these aspects were carried on in the immediate company of a large commode of others all of whom were treated alike and needed to do the same things together. other observation made was that all phases of a days activities were to be tightly scheduled and one activity led at a pre-arranged time to the next. (Willcocks D, Peace, S and Kellaher l, 1987)Notably, the whole sequence of activities was imposed from a high system of explicit formal rulings and a body of officials a hold singularity of lunacy and dominance within the total institutions.The assorted compel activities are brought together into a single rational plan which is designed to fulfill the officia l aims of the institution. The roles that are work outed by the inmates in the total institutions get along interests or are for the aims of the institution rather than the individual. Goffman identified four major dimensions of institutional life ranging from the rigidity of the routine, block treatment of inmates, depersonalization of inmates and complaisant distance between the staff and the inmates which Goffman termed as binary management.(Willcocks D, Peace, S and Kellaher l, 1987) forward one gets into prison they are from the home world where they already have an established conception of themselves. Entrance into the total institutions strips them off the benefits attached to the home world. Here, they are subjected to a series of abasement, degradation and humiliation. The consequence of this is that their self-importance becomes horrified. When in the institution an individual develops a moral career which is resolved or influenced by his surrounding. The role of the significant other becomes critical at this point.Goffman observed further that in the total institutions the process by which individuals were train was rather standard across all of them. This is a clear indication that life in these institutions is quite different from that which is experienced in the larger world and that it is a difficult task to have inmates maintain the same traits they had before they got in that respect. (Willcocks D, Peace, S and Kellaher l, 1987). Again, since the conditions were similar across the total institutions they were likely to establish similar traits.The first restriction of the self for the inmates takes place when the total institutions act as a barrier between the inmate and the general population. In the civilian life ones sequential roles are not in conflict with one another and so no roles hinders or rather blocks the performance of the others regardless of how frequent they were. Life in the institutions is in such a manner that role scheduling is disrupted as the inmates do not dictate what to do and when to do it. In other words they are denied the freedom to decide what role to perform and at what time.Instead there are round the clock surveillance where orders given are to be followed to the letter. In addition to the role scheduling being disrupted in the institution, role dispossession also takes place, Visitors are restricted and one is also restricted from frequenting places they initially did. Depending on whether the entrance into the total institution was voluntary or involuntary entering to such institutions someway prepares the individual to withdraw from home world or from the general population. (Willcocks D, Peace, S and Kellaher l, 1987).This preparation makes the adaptation in the new environment easier. Involuntary entry into the total institutions is however different as one may not be prepared for the new kind of life. Inmates may bewilder themselves perform some roles that they learnt i n the institutions on return to the general world. All the same there are certain houses that will have to be incurred or faced for instance the time for education or parenting. There is also the loss of legal privileges for instance one may not be in a position to attend to court proceedings on matters that affect them directly for instance adoption of a child.These privileges may be short term they maybe enjoyed on the completion of the term. However there are others with long term ramifications. The realization that one has not recede certain rights due to the barrier between him and the outside world may not auger well with him. There are other challenges that the inmate faces on return to the society. For instance there are the admission requirements where certain standards have to be followed or adhered to.On entrance to the total institutions various losses are incurred as for instance one may lose their hair, their identity as they are assigned numbers, they undress and ch ange their garb and are given institutional uniforms, they list their possessions, have to adhere to the rules and they are also assigned to certain quarters where they are to reside. According to Goffmanns findings the society is to blame for deviance within it as it subjects people it damage as wrong doers into harsh conditions and expects them to reform.(Willcocks D, Peace, S and Kellaher l, 1987). In the book the fiction of mental illness Thomas Szasz argued that mental illness was a myth. To him, the whole idea or notion of psychiatric illness could be termed as scientifically worthless and socially painful. (Shorter E, 1997). There are similarities between goffman and szasz ideologies. Goffman backed Szasz when he made the conclusion that the mental health institution he studied could be defined as a total institution where the closed system infantilized the patients and restricted their lives.Goffman noted that the clear diversion between the staff and the patients and on entrance to the institutions the patients faced humiliation, degradation, abasement and profanations of the self. Goffman rejected the idea of prisons and mental health institutions which according to him robbed off the inmates their time. The curse denied them living. The aspect of alienation is clear when the use of power is used by the staff members against the patients. He condemned the pretence by the staff members that they were out to attend the patients and dismissed it as a mere power grab.(Shorter E, 1997). Szasz argued that although psychological disorders are real, defining them as diseases was a way of imposing coercion in the society. He argued that defining such disorders as illness when they had no correlation with physical sickness was untrue. The only relationship existing between mental disorders and physical illness was the fact that they both made the individual unable to handle their daily activities or duties. (www. mdx. ac. uk). The psychological disorders according to Szasz were brought nigh by man.He further noted that compulsory psychiatry is a crime against humanity and it undermines freedom in the society. He quoted Mill to rid his observation that the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community against his will is to prevent harm to others. His own good either physical or moral is not sufficiently warranty. However unlike Mill, Szasz offered or rather provided no exception where power could be used forcefully.He advocated for freedom where all individuals are given the chance to choose what they find best for them. Although the compulsory psychiatry may not be harmful to the patients Szasz argues that it is not compatible with a free society. (www. mdx. ac. uk). He further advocates for the performance of universal constabulary which is not discriminative to anyone in the society. The same law applied to those termed as insane ought to be the same applied on those viewed as insane. Treating people otherwise is unfair as it implies that there is no equality and they are treated as special beings.Any form of special treatment on the allegations that one is mentally sick is dispossessed as it treats them as less human beings. (www. mdx. ac. uk). References Anthony Clare and Peter Sedgwick. Mental health and Civil Liberties. A theoretical contrast of Thomas Szasz. Retrieved on fifth march 2009 from http//www. mdx. ac. uk/WWW/STUDY/mhhlib. htmSzaszMyth Dianne M. Willcocks, Sheila M. Peace, Leonie A. Kellaher. 1987. Private Lives in Public Places A Research-based Critique of Residential Life in Local Authority gray-haired Peoples Homes. Taylor & Francis Publishers.Edward Shorter 1997. A History of Psychiatry From the earned run average of the Asylum to the Age of Prozac. John Wiley and Sons Publishers John Palmer Hawkins and Faris Kirkland. 2001. Army of hope, army of alienation culture and contradiction in the American Army communities of Cold c ontend Germany. Greenwood Publishing Group Tim Jordan, Steve Pile, 2002. Open University Social Change. Blackwell Publishing, Lewis Coser. 2006. Crime Theories and the Field of Criminology. Retrieved on 4th march 2009 from http//www. apsu. edu/oconnort/1010/1010lect02. htm.