Labeling Heory

One of the central rules of the modern age has been to differentiate young people from old ones and to arrange for young ones their own social space in society. In modern societies, the rationality of the social practices concerning norm offends have also been guided by making the difference between younger and older people and the other meanings associated to this. In this presentation, I will briefly describe, how social reactions towards juvenile crime have changed in Finland. The structure of the presentation is as follows. First, I will briefly make some methodological reflections on exploring societal reactions. Second, I will present a periodisation, which islang1033 based on changes in societal reactions towards juvenile crime in the Finnish context. Finally, I will make some notes and conclusions on the current debate on juvenile crime.par

par

par

pardkeepnqjb 1. Some methodological reflections on exploring societal reactions towards juvenile crimepar

pardfi284sl360slmult1qjlang2057b0par

The perspective of this presentation is historical and socio-political. I assume that lang1033 we need research which enables us to put the debate over crime among contemporary children and young people into a longer historical perspective. In our current research project in Helsinki, we believe that from the historical viewpoint we can evaluate the distinguishing features of the current debate and the sustainability of current youth policies. par

We are using a theoretical framework, which is called ldblquote A history of the presentrdblquote , which is familiar with David Garlandrquote s, Michel Foucaultrquote s and Nigel Partonrquote s excellent works. We are also re-warming theoretical tradition, which has later been called ldblquote labeling theoryrdblquote . lang2057 According to classic of labelling theory Edwin Lemert, the societal reaction is a very general term summarising both the expressive reactions of others toward deviation and action directed to its control. Lemert makes a difference between primary and secondary deviation. The notion of secondary deviation is devised to distinguish between original and effective causes of deviant attributes and different types of actions, like crime. Primary deviation, as contrasted with secondary, is polygenetic, arising out of a variety of social, cultural, psychological and physiological factors, either in adventitious or recurring combinations. The secondary deviation refers to a special class of socially defined responses which people make to problems created by the societal reaction to their deviance. These problems are essentially moral problems which revolve around stigmatization, punishments, segregation, and social control. While primary deviation may be socially recognized and even defined as undesirable, primary deviation has only marginal implications for the status and psychic structure of the person concerned, writes Lemert. Resultant problems dealt with reciprocally in the context of established status relationships. par

We are applying this approach to the study of generational relations. First, we assume that childhood is a relation. The concepts of childhood and adulthood cannot exist independently and in some sense, they always refer to each other because the relation is necessary and internal, as the critical realists assume. We are interest in, how and why - for example - different types of age categories historically appear and disappear, instead of isolating childhood and youth as cohorts and age categories apart from adulthood.par

Second, the generational relation is always power relation, which is put into practice on different levels of interaction. It is not only a question about face-to-face interaction, but also relations on the cultural and national levels, how certain presentations regarding children and the young become dominating and hegemonic. We may combine this perspective with the concepts primary and secondary deviation. Somehow, a child or youngster, who commits an offence, is ldblquote double-deviantrdblquote . Child is regarded as deviant with respect to grown-up adult. The concrete example may be a physical genotype. In comparison to a cultural construction of adult, who are regarded as capable to consider his or her act, and make rational choice between right and wrong, children are regarded as immature and irrational. Child or youngster, who commits an offence, is also deviant with respect locally and temporally defined ldblquote normal childrdblquote .par

Third, we may remember, how Michel Foucault wrote in his classic ldblquote Discipline and Punishrdblquote that it is not allowed to explore criminal sanctions as straight-forward manifestations of juridical provisions or social practices, but rather as the procedures, which are put