1. Identify what you believe is the strongest predictor of violent criminal behavior. Your response should include a reasonably thorough examination of the literature available from either text. In addition, your response should be supported with information. Be sure also to explain why you feel other factors commonly associated with crime causation do not adequately explain violent criminal behavior.
The strongest predictor of violent criminal behavior is quality of parenting (Cassel & Bernstein, 2007). Social factors influence behavior more strongly than biological or economic factors. Most violent crime such as rape and murder may have a relationship with economic problems but the underlying reason for the development of violent behavior is not necessarily economic. Poverty problems catalyze criminal behavior but this does not necessarily predict it more than social factors. Biological traits could also influence criminal behavior but not as strongly as social factors. (Hawkins et al., 2000)
Among the social factors, including familial and peer relations, the strongest predictor is also quality of parenting. Peer relations and social environment in the neighborhood could influence violent criminal behavior by modeling acceptable behavior to individuals (Cassel & Bernstein, 2007). However, these social factors do not predict violent criminal behavior as strongly as parenting style because of the lesser degree or proximity of influence of peers and the wider social community on violent criminal behavior.
Quality of parenting is the strongest predictor of violent criminal behavior for a number of reasons. First, parents exercise the strongest influence on the behavior of individuals at an early age. Value and norms of conduct exhibited during adolescence and adulthood are largely a result of parenting styles. Second, the influence of parents is the proximate social factor affecting individual behavior. During the growing-up years, children consider parents as the primary authority and model for behavior. It is only when they go to school and become adults that other social factors influence behavior. Nevertheless, the foundation of behavior is due to the influence of parents. Third, the quality of nurture and upbringing determines the propensity of individuals to commit violent criminal behavior. Various forms of victimization of children by their parents such as harsh discipline, parental rejection, absenteeism, neglect, exposure to domestic violence and other violent behavior, and commission of crimes such as rape and assault strongly influence criminal violent behavior. Victims of violence during childhood by their parents have a tendency to exhibit the same behavior in adolescence of adulthood. Children mimic the behavior of their parents, even violent behavior. (Hawkins et al., 2000; Cassel & Bernstein, 2007)
Many of the recognized strategies for crime prevention focus on early childhood development and the role of parents. Effective violent crime prevention strategies involves the active role of parents in providing quality parenting through information dissemination and awareness as well as socio-economic support to ensure parental presence in the home.
2. Domestic violence cases are some of the most complex of violent crimes investigated by law enforcement officials. Briefly discuss the social and psychological characteristics of both the offender and victim of a domestic assault. Then address the differences in the perception of the event by both parties. Finally, explain the reasoning behind the relatively new approach to investigating domestic assault and how it differs from the law enforcement response of the 1960s, 1970s, and early 1980s.
In the case of offenders, the characteristics are heterogeneous although most offenders are middle-aged Caucasian males belonging to low-income families. However, there are social and psychological characteristics that could aid in understanding the offenders in domestic assault. First is antisocial behavior exhibited in dependence on alcohol and drugs, difficulty in expressing empathy, and endorsement of macho behavior. Second is narcissism, which finds expression in the non-direct endorsement of macho attitudes. However, narcissists have the tendency to respond positively to macho attitudes to indicate tacit agreement with macho culture. Narcissists also express a dismissive form of attachment. Third is low pathology or exhibition of moderate narcissistic behavior and dismissive attachment. These do not express anger or engage in suicidal behavior and despite having experienced abuse during childhood have not reported the incident. Fourth are emotional dependents who exhibit high degrees of dependence in relationships, fearful attachment, strongly express anger, experience depression or anxiety, fast to blame others, experienced physical and sexual violence during childhood, and suicidal tendencies. (Gilchrist et al., 2003)
With regard to the victims of domestic assault, the characteristics are also heterogeneous but most victims of domestic violence are females, under 40 years of age, and belong to low income classes. The salient psychological profile of victims is dependent attachment since victims are likely to be unemployed. Depression and anxiety are also likely characteristics of victims of domestic assault since a number of victims are alcohol dependents with previous experience of violence. (Gilchrist et al., 2003)
The profile of offenders and victims supports differences in the perception of domestic assault. On one hand, offenders usually blame the victim for the incident or blame alcohol and drugs as the reason that made them commit violence. Other offenders exhibiting narcissistic behavior would dismiss the incident as a common occurrence and within acceptable norms. On the other hand, many victims accept blame for the incident and bear it because of their dependent attachments. If hospital or police personnel question victims, the immediate response would be to justify the incident with excuses such as accident. These perspectives make it difficult to investigate domestic violence.
Improvements in the investigation of domestic assault occurred in the last decade in an effort to address the complexity of this crime. Previously, the approach to investigation was ‘one-size-fits all’, which means common assumptions for domestic assault without considering the particular context of the victims and offenders. This led to a dismissive perception of the justice system worsening the situation for many victims. The new approach to investigation is collaborative and customized with many law enforcement agencies establishing desks or teams handing domestic assault investigations and working together with support groups and other advocate groups to provide the best help for victims or the appropriate intervention. (Felson, Ackerman & Gallagher, 2005)
References
Cassel, E., & Bernstein, D. A. (2007). Criminal behavior. London: Routledge.
Gilchrist, E., Johnson, R., Takriti, R., Weston, S., Beech, A., & Kebbell, M. (2003). Domestic violence offenders: Characteristics and offending related needs. London: Home Office.
Felson, R. B., Ackerman, J. M., & Gallagher, C. (2005). Police intervention and the repeat of domestic assault. Final Report Police Intervention and the Repeat of Domestic Assault Award #2002-WG-BX-0002. Retrieved October 16, 2008, from
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/210301.pdf
Hawkins, J. D., Herrenkohl, T. I., & Farrington, D. P., Brewer, D., Catalano, R. F., Harachi, T. W., & Cothern, L. (2000). Predictors of youth violence. Juvenile Justice Bulletin April 2000. Retrieved October 16, 2008, from http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/ojjdp/179065.pdf
0 comments:
Post a Comment