• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

How has John Braithwaite contributed to debates on crime, and what are the policy implications of his work?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

How has John Braithwaite contributed to debates on crime, and what are the policy implications of his work? The law, crime and how we, as a society, should deal with criminal elements has historically been a hot bed of debate. When looking at Braithwaite and his contributions to debates on crime I will concentrate on criminological aspects of the discourse and theories of punishment. Ideas range from the feminist perspective, which views law and all aspects of punishment as a way of suppressing women. The Marxist perspective, which views punishment as an effective way of further suppressing the proletariat, to desert theorists who view punishment as something that is deserved and should be metered out to befit the crime. Generally speaking however we can divide the more specific camps into two theories Utilitarianism and Retributivism. John Braithwaite's contribution has been to look at punishment from a completely different perspective in conceptualising his theory Republicanism. At the very least the implications of his theories are to provide a new perspective with which we can look at punishment of criminals. At most his ideas could pave the way for a complete reformation of the criminal justice system, as we know it. It can be said that there are six aims of punishment; * Deterrence - on an individual and community wide level. * Incapacitation * Desert * Rehabilitation * Denunciation * Restitution Utilitarians emphasise the importance of Deterrence, Incapacitation and Rehabilitation. According to Nigel Walker utilitarian theorists see punishment as a deterrent to avoid future crime1. Deterrence is aimed not only at the individual but also the community. In this sense utilitarian theory is seen as consequentialist in that it looks at future offending as well as immediate issues of how to deal with current offenders. ...read more.

Middle

It is a tool used to shape moral concepts in society and enable the community to distinguish between right and wrong. This in turn promotes community consensus and cohesion. Denunciatioin if followed by restitution whereby the offender is released back to the community after serving their deserved sentence. Criticisms of retributive theory are as strident as those towards utilitarianism. In relation to desert theory some see its vengeful roots as inappropriate. Some might say uncivilised. Proportinality presents problems too in that Ashworth and Von Hirsh do not elaborate on limits or bounderies that should be considerd when settingm out the poarralel rankings of offence and punishment. We can assume that the offence ladder will be set out in a logical manner but when considering the Cardinal rankings there is not help offerd as to the sentencing gap between offeces, minumum punsihmetns or maximum limits. This means that other principles have to be considerd by thise drawing up the comparanle tables. These new principles may conflict with those of desert. Questions ar erasied as to the fairness of opunishing thos with social problems. This stem from mitgiatiojg circumstances only being considerd at sentencing stage. How do we measure harm and culpability? Since the theory os soley based on these principles we need a way which ensures that these are beingm measuyred fairly, doies such a system exist? Retributivist theory assumes that society operates on siome form of consensus and that this can be furtherd through denunciation in particular. We live in a pluralistic society. Is consensus possible? In addition it is assumed that society en mass understands crime, sentencing, the criminajustice system. There is strong evidence which suggests that communities are confused and contradictory when it comes to their assessment opf crime. ...read more.

Conclusion

criminals negate theier right to certain priviledges. Criticisms aside it is clear that Braithwaites contributions, which strech far beyond republican theory at the very least have broken the norm of looking at punishment from a pessimistic point of view. He has been accused of taking the best parts of utilitarianism and retributivism and molding them into one theory but I think he goes further than that. Yes, there is a strong element of rehabilitation and of deterrence in republicantheory, but any theory which seeks to re-integrate a criminal back into the community must undertake these roles inborder for it to be successful. The policy implication of his theory are largely dependant on dominat political thinking and public perception. On paper republican theory looks very attractive, but in reality it is unlikely that a governbemtn, or a community is going to be ready to instigate it. When it comes to punishment it can be said that we are still driven by vengeful attitudes. However, there is no reason why elements of braithwaites theory should not be included in the criminal justice system today and they could possibly have a very positive effect in areas he has looked at such as juvinille, diomestic violence, drink driving and white collare crime. We should not close the door to his nption of re-integrative shaming companies cannot perform without the support of communities and except for the minority who wants to feel the wrath of their families and the community? 1 N. Walker, Why Punish (1991) (OUP). Page 6 - Course materials 2 D. Reily 3 J. Braithwaite, Reducing the Crime Problem: A Not So Dismal Crimonology (Course Materials), pg 49. 4 J. Braithwaite, Not just Desert, 1990. 5 A.Ashworth and A Von Hirsh (1992). Not Not Just Deserts. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies vol 12 no 1 (course materials) ?? ?? ?? ?? 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Crime & Deviance section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Crime & Deviance essays

  1. Sociological Theories on Crime and Deviance

    Such religious subcultures may encourage respectability and conformity. Key Pryce (1979) found in the black community is Bristol identified a variety of subcultures or lifestyles including hustlers, Rastafarians, saints and working class respectable. Left realists argue criminal subcultures still subscribe to values and goals of mainstream society such as materialism and consumerism.

  2. How useful are Sociological Theories in explaining crime and the control of crime? Consider ...

    Positivists failed to see the reliability of deterrence as a form of punishment and favored methods of incapacitation and reform. In contrast to Classicist thinking, the idea was not that punishment should fit the crime, but that treatment should fit the individual, this highlighting what is referred to as the 'individualized treatment model' (Cavatina & Dignan 2002, p50).

  1. Describe psychological research on offender profiling and Evaluate psychological research on offender profiling.

    and therefore it lacked ecological validity, the participants may not have made much effort as they would have done in a real life case. The fourth evaluation issue is cultural specificity, which is when studies are only really relevant to one culture.

  2. Discuss the effectiveness of the Prison system, and its purpose in relation to its ...

    They are often placed in prisons far away from where their families live making visitations more difficult. There are almost 73,000 prisoners in the United Kingdom, with each place costing the almost �25,000 per year (2002), that is the equivalent to a cost of almost �500 per prisoner per week,

  1. Critically discuss the practical and ethical difficulties involved when researching White Collar Crime. Give ...

    Information is rarely voluntarily submitted to the researcher and therefore is often negotiated between what are known as gate keepers and the researcher. Davis et al (1999: 16) defines gate keepers as "individuals or groups of individuals who have the power to control access to data required to accomplish research.

  2. Referring to the John Duffy "Railway Rapist" case to illustrate, discuss the strengths and ...

    There are a number of misconceptions about profiling, usually based on its fictional use and psycho-dynamic portraits of politicians. Rarely does profiling provide the specific identity of the offender, and this is not its purpose. The aim is to narrow the field of the investigation and suggest the type of person who committed the crime (Douglas et al, 1986).

  1. Assess the right realist view that crime is the result of biological rational factors ...

    If the perceived rewards of crime (money) outweigh the perceived costs of crime (prison) then they are more likely to commit. Or if the rewards of crime appear to be greater that those of non-criminal behaviour, then people will be more likely to offend.

  2. subcultural theory

    However, Merton's theory has been criticized by a number of sociologists. Some critics argue that Merton "over predicts and exaggerates working class crime, and under-predicts and underestimates middle class and white-collar crime". Similarly, Merton has also been criticized by Valier (2001)

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work