Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

WHY THE VICTIM’S POINT OF VIEW? AUTONOMY AGAINST INTIMACY IN CRIME AND ADDICTION CONTROL Pekka Sulkunen Professor of Sociology University of Helsinki Collegium.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "WHY THE VICTIM’S POINT OF VIEW? AUTONOMY AGAINST INTIMACY IN CRIME AND ADDICTION CONTROL Pekka Sulkunen Professor of Sociology University of Helsinki Collegium."— Presentation transcript:

1 WHY THE VICTIM’S POINT OF VIEW? AUTONOMY AGAINST INTIMACY IN CRIME AND ADDICTION CONTROL Pekka Sulkunen Professor of Sociology University of Helsinki Collegium of Advanced Studies ASA 2011, Session 556 Crime Law and Deviance Tuesday 22 Aug 2.30 pm

2 Welfare and Control Theories of Deviance Penal welfarism Causes of deviance: need, injustice, deprivation Functions of punishment: – Perfectibility of man – Prevention of recidivism – Deterrence Control Theory Functions of punishment – Compassion to victims – Deterrence Causes of deviance: – inadequate control – Irresponsibility of offenders Garland, David (2001) The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

3 Victim’s point of view: consequences Lower thresholds Longer sentences Punitive control techniques Growing prison populations Mandatory mediation procedures

4 Explaining the VPW Garland: – Neoliberalism – Conservatism This paper: – Consequence of saturated modernity – Derives from the Theory of Moral Sentiments by Adam Smith, and from the general theory of justification

5

6 Sage, London 2009

7 Therapeutic functions of custody? Finland 1964: involuntary admissions to asylums occurred during … in custody at the end of the year  Many incarcerations were short, especially so when the reason was a crime (minor offences)  Control system harsh and selective against ”vulnerable populations”

8 (Neo)-classical theory of punishment Edward Westermarck (1906): ). The Origin and Development of Moral Ideas. London: Macmillan. Nils Christie (1981): Limits to Pain. Oslo University Press, Oslo  penalties are based on resentment, not their functions  should be proportional to the degree of responsibility of the offender and the gravity of the offence, and no other considerations should be applied.

9 A. Smith: Theory of Moral Sentiments (1790) Moral sentiments based on natural “passions” Selfish (self-love, self-interest)  prudence Social (love, friendship, affection)  kindness, generosity Unsocial (hatred and anger)  justice

10 A. Smith & media theory: As crime becomes increasingly mediatised, appeal to primary moral sentiments takes precedence over moral sentiments that are mere “embellishments” of social life. Anger and hatred towards perpetrators, combined with compassion towards innocent victims, are strong emotions compared with more reason-based reflections on rational crime prevention.

11 Boltanski & Thévenot (2006): Theory of Justification Principles of belonging and difference: citizenship and class Principles of dignity and worth: individual freedom and welfare Principle of the Common Good: Progress

12 From Pastoral to Epistolary Power Pastoral Normative Uniform Authoritarian Discriminating Inclusive Epistolary (apostolic) Abstract goals: welfare, health security Individual differences Anti-authoritarian Tolerant Exclusive

13 Autonomy and intimacy Difference may reduce the autonomy of others: – Cost – Thirc party victimisation – Identity Need to regulate: Juridification of the state Emphasis on justice

14 CONCLUSION The Culture of Control follows from the maturation of modern ideals of dignity and worth Conflicts between autonomy and intimacy (difference) cause the need to regulate Emphasis on justice (the non-social passions), not uniformity  Victim’s point of view!

15 Sage, London psulkune/


Download ppt "WHY THE VICTIM’S POINT OF VIEW? AUTONOMY AGAINST INTIMACY IN CRIME AND ADDICTION CONTROL Pekka Sulkunen Professor of Sociology University of Helsinki Collegium."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google