Support for children and solutions for societal problems have declined to such a state, that there is little hope for them to realise their hopes and ambitions (Yates et al, 2010). This has alienated the youth of today and there is no incentive for active engagement in the society they perceive. Without a connection to one’s own community there is no understanding of social morals and no interest in the values instilled upon them. This is further exacerbated when considering the treatment of youth going through the justice system which moves on to the second part of the essays question. Due to the stresses that the youth of today go through is it right that youth crime should be met with a tough response? Figures published by the Home
…show more content…
The problem with giving custodial sentences to offending youth is that it may not be helping whatsoever. In fact, it may be making things worse. In 2010 the reoffending rate for juveniles stood at 34.1 per cent compared to 24.9 per cent for adults even though the number of adults that move through the criminal justice system is five times higher than that of juveniles (MOJ). So why is the juvenile reoffending rate so high? General Labelling theorists suggest that an official response to juvenile delinquency encourages future delinquency. However in more depth, labelling theory has two further suggestions as to how a label may lead to an increase in deviancy and therefore further criminality. One suggestion is that the label alters a youth’s personal identity towards a more deviant self concept thus becoming a self - fulfilling prophecy (matsueda 1992). Furthermore, deviance is primary and secondary. This secondary deviance stems from social reaction to their behaviour and in turn the individual begins to internalise the deviant status given by society and once again fulfils it. This may then lead to associating with other deviants (Becker, 1963), this will lead to an increase in …show more content…
It has been shown that youth has always been considered less respectful and more deviant than their predecessors. Crime however has increased in the UK over the years up until 2007 in which there has been a significant fall. There have been outbursts of defiance against social control with such incidents as the 2011 UK riots, but the neo-liberal society we live in has to take some responsibility for it. With the decline of educational and employment opportunities that were available to previous generations, and the society of ownership of the commodities that are out of the financial reach of those without the means to procure them. It’s no wonder the youth of today are disconnected from social morals if they are not included in society. Furthermore, the perceptions of loss of control are no entirely accurate either. Figures, stating that 25 percent of youth are committing criminal acts are taken out of context, the true amount of crime committed by youth is not known. The statement that this apparent loss of control ‘justifies a tough response?’ It has been shown that a tough response on crime by way of incarceration can not only have a negative impact on the person but can actually encourage a person to become criminal. Sentencing a person for a short period can also be viewed as a purely retributive form of punishment with no rehabilitation by way of program or
The problem with giving custodial sentences to offending youth is that it may not be helping whatsoever. In fact, it may be making things worse. In 2010 the reoffending rate for juveniles stood at 34.1 per cent compared to 24.9 per cent for adults even though the number of adults that move through the criminal justice system is five times higher than that of juveniles (MOJ). So why is the juvenile reoffending rate so high? General Labelling theorists suggest that an official response to juvenile delinquency encourages future delinquency. However in more depth, labelling theory has two further suggestions as to how a label may lead to an increase in deviancy and therefore further criminality. One suggestion is that the label alters a youth’s personal identity towards a more deviant self concept thus becoming a self - fulfilling prophecy (matsueda 1992). Furthermore, deviance is primary and secondary. This secondary deviance stems from social reaction to their behaviour and in turn the individual begins to internalise the deviant status given by society and once again fulfils it. This may then lead to associating with other deviants (Becker, 1963), this will lead to an increase in …show more content…
It has been shown that youth has always been considered less respectful and more deviant than their predecessors. Crime however has increased in the UK over the years up until 2007 in which there has been a significant fall. There have been outbursts of defiance against social control with such incidents as the 2011 UK riots, but the neo-liberal society we live in has to take some responsibility for it. With the decline of educational and employment opportunities that were available to previous generations, and the society of ownership of the commodities that are out of the financial reach of those without the means to procure them. It’s no wonder the youth of today are disconnected from social morals if they are not included in society. Furthermore, the perceptions of loss of control are no entirely accurate either. Figures, stating that 25 percent of youth are committing criminal acts are taken out of context, the true amount of crime committed by youth is not known. The statement that this apparent loss of control ‘justifies a tough response?’ It has been shown that a tough response on crime by way of incarceration can not only have a negative impact on the person but can actually encourage a person to become criminal. Sentencing a person for a short period can also be viewed as a purely retributive form of punishment with no rehabilitation by way of program or