Q3: 'By attracting after the insights of Symbolic Interactionism, the labelling perspective highlights the importance of how people react to events and the manner in which replies form self-perceptions. ' Discuss, with particular reference to the impact of the labelling point of view on criminological theory.
Labelling point of view has negative and positive impact on world and person. Labelling point of view and symbolic interactionism are inter-depended ideas. They stand for a few theories where it is categorized as cultural response theory where it focuses on society's reaction for the deviant rather than the individual of deviant. It's the sociology of deviancy. However, the labelling theorists declare that their theory never cause criminality straight but they sophisticated the situation across the criminals and the possibilities of their unlawful occurrence. It is called sociology of deviancy.
Labelling emerged up to UK only in 1960's from European countries from the affect of Elvis Presley and rock and roll n move culture. Here Frederick Thrasher has quoted in his juveline gangs that established labeling provides negative effect on youths. Later on the issue of the labeled person will be and act based on the description was brought about by Frank Tannenbaum (1938).
Interactionist theory is of this a person's life is affected by those being interacted even though the culture, family track record and genetics has influence on one's life. Therefore the interactions could impact one's lifestyle through symbolizing and labeling him.
Labeling perspective targets society and person. Lemert says that problem occurs when individual is labeled and he recognizes the label. Becker says that the world determine the guideline for criminality and deviance. It really is applied to those who disobey those guidelines and called criminals. So those who find themselves tagged are alienated from society.
A few issues needs to be look thoroughly as with the way the person of tagged being analysed, the a reaction to the label, whats the impact in the circle they live, if the labeling has evolved their self image. To begin with, it should be clearly seen, what exactly are the behaviours that is catogarized as criminals. The consumption of representatives in power on labeling and whats the effect that it is wearing individual ?
Labelling would give a person negative impact internally which affects his behavior. Becker however disagreed that labelling point of view had induced deviance. It does not imply ones he steals, he would take again.
According to him, the inner changes to an offender are due to the people and whom they socialize to. However there was also idea brought about by Matsueda a person's own view of himself is damaged because of the way others treat and view them. This is shows it can be an impact of labelling.
Labelling perspective is split into two; major deviance and supplementary deviance. First ones is of a person who had break typical and guidelines yet is not bothered of the labelled that has been stamped on his by the representatives or society. This is done through justification of the crime They are those would you not react to the societal reaction of labelling. Theorists also say that these people are falsely labelled. This obviously does not imply that the offender is innocent but he had disagreed to accepts the actual fact that the work is legal and he's a criminal. Culture disapproves his behavior and categorize as less-worthy ones. Yet the offender will not bother of the label. However, the negative impact of the labelling is the fact it might transform the offender into the form that he previously been labelled by the society.
The second option ones, extra deviance is of a behavior that is because of social response and self applied image. Yet theorists say that labelling is the sole cause for all. Here the labelling is performed by the jail, people of electric power such as police and similar companies. The society decides the label on the individuals by looking at the folks of power's reaction. The labelled ones are viewed differently in the modern culture. The impact this; some will accept the label and some has no notion of what's his image and agree to the label. The image is brought about to 1 by the interpersonal conversation is negative impact.
Theorist of thoughts and opinions that labelling by officers will not give much impact to individuals however the stigmatisation from the contemporary society which he's belong to or respect. In the event the society is aware of the label, it'll affect the way people treat them. Usually legal label can be an overriding label. For example, the manager presently labelled as a thief. The labelled would think he is a thief more in comparison to he is a manager. So this will not only provide a negative impact to the average person but the society. They would learn to reject the presence of the labelled among them.
The labelling adversely impacts his profession as with his refusal to continue working due to the label. Society sees the labelled as less worthy than others of world. The labelling continues on negatively for the offender even in the culture, friends, relatives and regulation abiding modern culture.
At previous when everyone segregates them, they induce themselves to maintain the friend of other regulation - breakers who accept them. Here even the innocent labelled person will learn new crimes and criminal principles within relationship with them. The drug user who's eliminated from population now will indulge in other crimes as well. "If they do once, they 'may' do it again" is the term police solely rely on, where it aggravate the criminality when they demand the offenders when a crime similar from what occurred previously in the particular area.
The expression 'may' will lead those action and reactions inescapable. Though some offenders will realize the flaws done and make contact with the normal life. It is still argued that the labelling internalised the individuals and criminality occurs because of the social reaction to them.
The most severe impact created by labelling perspective is through prison. It really is a dorm for the offenders to learn new crimes and raise the degree of criminality as they are alienated from the contemporary society. These offenders just accept the label of legal without hesitation while in jail as they believe that they are unable to change the label. Which means this provokes these to commit more crime on their release. Clearly, that the labelling possessed give a negative impact as in increasing the crime rate. Nevertheless the positive impact do occur as in a few of offenders will not admit the label as their activities were not sincerely criminal and some would make an effort to lead a normal life rather than reoffend again.
Whatever their reasons may be, however the society are not ready to admit them in the world due to the stigmatisation. The negative influences of labelling continue as with the name of ex-prisoner. He faces the problem of having a job, acceptance into contemporary society and police monitoring. Though he had moved out of the label of unlawful, the society refuses to allow him in their community. Theorists have been arguing that the procedure of labelling would lead to criminality is equivalent to of sociable control to regulation abiding society. The labelling and control would lead to one to redefine himself and acknowledge labels.
The impact of labelling is not only on individuals but categories. One group label the other as deviant can make the other ones alienated from the world. More crime is done by the group when the excluders obstruct their social interactions. Current offense shows they have got accepted the label which is not bothered from it.
Controlling and labelling has created a malicious circle for the criminals. Young commented over a marijuana issue that involves Marijuana Tax Action 1937 where the labelling of press has worsened the criminality. They are adversely labelled where more control from police is provided. It made the offenders treated injustice and wished to revenge back by acting resistant to the intolerant society. That is criminality raises in society due to labelling.
Labelling is not of is not really a theory of causation but of interpreting what goes on. It is not that the labelling create certain type of behaviours but instead they and their results may lead any offenders to choose one than it as a course for criminality. Though these explanations is not strong enough to gratify the accusation of labelling has a poor impact, in theory and sensible it has always been viewed as a non causative theory.
Next is an offender is classed negatively without considering the act is actually could be treated as normal. This makes the offender suffer as a sufferer as his moral element of the function is eliminated. That is because of the labelling of the expert as only regulation sometimes appears but moral values and the genuine element in committing the act.
The effect of labelling is at times unpredictable as in situations of arrest in local violence. (Sherman) where utilized persons avoid the action further but those of unemployed found to do something in more violent anticipated to arrest which has made them being labelled.
It will not hold up against an empirical screening. It could express sociable and sometimes of politics message. The cultural reaction brings about the difficulty in testing the level of criminality. It is already problems even prior to the label is formal. Results are ambiguous in the endeavors of testing.
Labelling is actually a system of capitalism. It ignores the impact and political importance where it is against radical criminology.
As this while the labelling perspective is seen in negative manner, so John Braithwaite has brought about the positive program using the idea above which is called reintegrative shaming. Positive effects are to be made out of this. The main notion of this is to help make the labelled person realise of the mistake and effects that it has created. At the same time, it is good for the society to forgive the offenders problem and accept them back into the culture.
The idea is done in a process of two ways, first of all the offender need to be confronted in front victim. Secondly, the process is done before the offenders family or those considered important in his life because they are to make him to be accepted in the society.
These ideas of Braithwaite claimed be able to give positive effects as actually the real idea behind any reparation and extreme care plus is designed for the offenders to acknowledge the guilt and have for forgiveness from the sufferer. this is an outstanding idea for the goal above as it has been vastly found in New Zealand Morris, Australia-Strang, Forsythe, and some elements of America-Alford. This had been used extensively in Britain with Offense and Disorder Action 1998 had been widely used as part of reparation Maxwell and Morris, Dignan, Young and Goold.
Reintergrative shaming is in fact an early on cautioning for the offenders as of like in situations of warning, reprimand, take decision of bail decisions, before accounts are ready, part of sentencing, decision as to release and post-release involvement. this is really a terrific way to reduce white collar crimes and corporate and business violations of legislation (Simpsons). With this some could get away from from being convicted even at the first stage. Labelling does indeed develop a turning point for the offenders from committing further offences and blunders.
Labelling theory has been a guideline for most to stay away from crimes and legal actions. The procedure of preventing the interactions with the labels would make the law-abiding population prevented from performing out the criminality. (Vold and Bernard). Especially for those who are young and new offenders.
Police could manage the offenders off the unlawful justice system as labelling is easily done through modern culture. The state cautioning will not make out of formal control but it gives him a second chance to emerge from the stigmatisation. So community service and probation are presented. This allows them to be away from incarceration and reduce the stigma and labelling.
However, there had been complains that this are not effective as the rate of people being incarcerated have not reduced. So those who are being punished now are those who had been labelled before. It shows the labelling had not brought any good impact as said.
Conclusion, it is not due to way world views had improve the criminality and bad behavior but the concentrate of marketing and officials which had turn into it. Although action taken was not harsh but the reaction directed at it had made the offenders internalise the labelled do it yourself image. Its figured the labelling perspective is to set-up knowing of the existence of the criminality rather than for the advantage of specific. So in acting out the duty, it does bring more negative impact rather than positive to the individual.