Criminology and Social Harm - Article Example

There has been many arguments and debate of the relationship between criminology and social harm. We all have grown up knowing what crime is. However, there is nothing intrinsic to any particular event or incident which makes it a crime. Crime and criminals are made up characters in the sense that they have to be constructed before they can exist. In short crime has no ontological reality and it is just something that we need to live by. Now, as it does not have any ontological reality, the criminal law uses a number of complex tests and rules to determine whether or not a crime has been committed. One such test is the concept of mens rea better known as the “the guilty mind”. This concept applies mainly to an individual but not completely and the simple failure to act is sufficiently blameworthy to be a crime. However, this kind of test is an artifice in a number of respects because it is impossible to understand what is going through the minds of a person. Therefore, mens rea has to be judged by proxy through examining the person’s words and deeds. It is also questionable whether a magistrate or a jury would actually arrive at a decision based on this kind of test where the result can be uncertain or even false. (Hillyard, Pantazis, Tombs, Gordon, and Dorling, 2005) On the other hand, social harm is defined as the lack of welfare for an individual, whether it is in the form of shortage of food, inadequate housing, low income, exposure to many different dangers, violation of basic human rights and also victimization to various forms of crime. Social harm does not fall evenly to all groups. It usually falls upon people of different social classes, genders, degrees of physical ability, racial and ethnic groups, different ages, sexual preferences and so on. There are many different types of social harm that an individual or a group can face. There are various types of social harm such as Physical, Financial, emotional and psychological and even sexual harm. Physical harm consists of domestic violence, child abuse, improper medical treatment, which leads to premature deaths and racist attacks or bad treatment by state officials. Financial harm consists of malpractice by private organization and individuals, misuse of funds by the government and redistribution of wealth and income from the poorer to the richer through regressive taxation and welfare policies. On the other hand, emotional and psychological harm are difficult to measure and also relate to specific causes. An example can be given is of the stopping and searching on young members of African American and Muslim community. Sexual Harm is also considered to be a social harm because of the trauma that a rape victim faces. However, it is said that harm also does not have an ontological reality and is no more definable than crime. (Hillyard, Pantazis, Tombs, Gordon, and Dorling, 2005) There are several policy responses to social harm approach. The aim of welfare should be to reduce the extent of harm that any person faces. The response to social harm requires debates about policy, resources and priorities. However, the shift from criminal justice to a broadly defined social policy raises the question of efficacy and justice. Another debate or response to social harm is that if the offenders of the low class are treated harshly then the same treatment should be given to other types of offenders. There are various differences between social harm and crime but in general if we look at it, crime is a form of social harm. It has only been given a different outlook. Social harm is not a grudge among one single individual but it consist of a group of people or a community. Any single person can commit a crime towards one or within his or her own group but social harm on the whole is the lack of proper welfare of the people in all respect which we have describe above. On the other hand, it should also be noted that social harm is not distributed evenly among all classes but when it comes to crime, it does not see which class or status the person belongs to. There are inadequate methods to control crime which is also ineffective and also it does not include much serious harms that social harms relate to which we have describe above. The best way to hear about a murder that has taken place in and around us is through the media, be it in the form of newspaper, radio or television. The act or the portrayal of murder usually sells the media and it tries to put fear among the general public. The media shows, who, when, why and where the murders took place and with what weapon was it committed. The way they describe this hideous crime often tends us to alter the daily routine of our lives and many a times it plays with the subconscious and tends to alter a person behavior and attitude. It also makes them look at other people differently. Usually the most popular way that the media uses is the portrayal of murder by the victim itself. Murder is a part of our everyday life but over the last twenty five years the chances of being murdered in Britain has fallen for most groups of people. However, the chances of young men being murdered have risen so much that again the overall murder rate has increased. This is due to the fatal violence in the poorest of the neighborhoods of the country. Viewed from the location of the victim from where the harm impacts, the pattern of murder follow geographical and demographic trends in the recent economic and social history of Britain. Young, working men living in the poorest parts of the country also gives rise to murder. The rates have fallen for men aged sixty and above and under five and also over the years the country has seen a sharp decline in murder rate. (Hillyard, Pantazis, Tombs, Gordon, and Dorling, 2005) The viewpoint of Danny Dorling shows that many people in Britain have agreed to capital punishment for offenders committing murder. On the other hand, only a small proportion of deaths that result from social harm are legally labeled as murder. The death due to poverty is no less painful and no less harmful than murder. Danny Dorling also describes that the death by usage of mass tobacco poisoning and the neglect for the same explains the stagnation of life expectancy in the poorest parts of UK but it seems to soar high in the richest part. The use of guns has risen in the poorest ward of the country in the past twenty years. Majority of murders are not carefully planned and are acts of sudden violence probably without the intent to kill in many cases. Murders are placed at the top of social harm. Danny Dorling also forms a theory that suicide is also a socially pattern just like murder although it relates to loneliness. Another fact, that Danny Dorling mention is that social harm, which is a product of uncaring society, does more than just kill young people. The abuse to people’s dignity, their rights to opportunity and their rights to respect are continuously damaged. Another factor that gives rise to murder rates is the ever-increasing gap of inequalities between the rich and the poor. (Dorling, 2006) Steve Tombs talks about the harm and injuries, which are work, related. Usually it has been seen that people who are under the exposure of asbestos face a lot of problems and also it may result to death. This is one of the major problems in the UK. However, the result for achieving protection is to be left with people who know the risk of working under such environment and are prone to many injuries and chronic illness. Injury relation to fracture, amputation, loss of sight and concussion are defined as major injuries while injury fall outside these categories but it causes the injured person to be absent from work for couple of days. The cost associated with injuries and ill-health represents a huge redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich. However, to reduce the injuries which are work related certain laws have been formed. One such law is the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. If an injury is caused and the inspection and investigation is conducted, the organization can be prosecuted. Also a single death or injury can lead to more than one prosecution depending on the total number of incident that has resulted in at least one organization. (Hillyard, Pantazis, Tombs, Gordon, and Dorling, 2005) Social harm is relatively open and hence many arguments and debates regarding the same takes place. On the other hand, the problem is that harm becomes defined socially as they are recognized by the majority of the population. Therefore, people’s experience must inform, but cannot constitute a social harm approach. Social harm is simply to reflect a moral or a political viewpoint. Another limitation factor of social harm is that it makes it difficult in identifying the offenders and also social harm lacks clarity in its approach. On the other hand, social harm approach has an advantage over criminology as it has a greater potential for joined up analysis and prescription which means that to treat social harm a proper understanding is required in field of social, economic and public policy. (Dorling, 2006) Let us now sum up and see whether harm matters more than crime. As we have already seen that both social harm and crime have no definable explanation and that they both don’t have any ontological reality. However, it is a fact that social harm is an ongoing process and comes in various forms. Social harm can occur at any time and at any given place be it home, office or even public places whereas crime as seen is just another form of harm. On the other hand, it is also noted that crime does not see any class or status neither does it distinguishes between the rich and the poor whereas social harm is distributed unevenly and the heavy burden of it is faced by the people of low minority groups. We know that social harm relates to the lack of welfare that is provided to the people and the protection of their basic human rights. Crime is no violation it is something that plays on a persons mind which compels him to perform an act that hurts someone. Murder as we have seen is given the top position in harm and other forms of it comes in physical, financial emotional and psychological. Therefore, we can say that social harm matters more than crime but since many have formed that lacks the clarity it is explanation and that is open for debate and arguments. However, both crime and harm have their own strategies. References 1. Dorling, D. 2006. Policing the borders of crime: who decides research? Available at: http://sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/publications/2006/borders_of_crime.pdf (accessed on September 29, 2008) 2. Hillyard, P., Pantazis, C., Tombs, S., Gordon, D., and Dorling, D. 2005. Criminal Obsession: Why harm matters more than crime, Crime and Society Foundation, Pluto Press Read More