Phenomenon of crime is socially constructed

When conducting a discussion on the relationship between crime and morality or crime and social conscience the debate could be said to be akin to that of the chicken and the egg.

Which came first? Social constructivists would say that every crime is a product of social construction or stereotype. The opposing argument would be that legislation is guided by other external principles and that these shape our social beliefs and make us acknowledge that this or that crime is socially unacceptable.Various studies could (and have) been conducted which may show that one side or the other is right, or whether there is some truth in both of the arguments. One such study is that of Ann Grady1. In the process of this essay it will be my task to decide whether this study supports the social constructivist viewpoint and whether it can be used as an argument to prove the same. It may be pertinent to first talk about Grady's study and the findings that resulted.

As it obvious from the title the study was about the prevalence of female-to-male domestic violence in households in this country. The truth of the matter was that, although female victims were more likely to get seriously hurt as a result of violence, the figures regarding male and female instances of violence were not at all dissimilar. However, with this in mind, the reported and recorded cases of female-to-male violence in police statistics were disproportionately small.Grady has understandably put this down to the feminist stereotype that is prevalent in our society that, as the male has always been seen to be the dominant partner it is the job of the criminal system to protect the physically subordinate females from the grasps of the misogynist man. Grady argues that the effects of this stereotype have affected both police and male victims attitudes in such a way as to force the reported and recorded occurrences of such violence under the carpet.

I believe that there is great weight to what Grady is saying in her article.When a viewpoint reflecting popular opinion is disseminated into society; either through a pressure group or majority opinion, or through the media, a social ideal or stereotype is born (for example, 'all victims of domestic violence are female'), these stereotypes can affect crime in two main ways. The way that Grady highlights is the influence they have on the police force. The stereotype affects the force perspective of a certain crime, which then leads to a cop culture of treating people involved in such crimes in certain ways.If police do not believe that men can legitimately be victims of domestic violence they are less likely to take any reported incident seriously and are unlikely to record such an incident. Therefore, police figures on domestic violence will reflect crimes against women and not men.

Similarly, if men are generally aware that the police have such an attitude towards male victims they are less inclined to report an incident in the first place. A consequence of both these reactions is that domestic violence becomes a crime perpetrated against women and not men.It would seem from this that Grady's article could definitely be used to support the idea that a crime can be socially constructed (at least in the realm of domestic violence) but can it be used to support a wider view that all crimes are socially constructed? As has been seen in Grady's article a social ideal or stereotype can affect the perception of a crime through the actions of the police but, as I have said above, there is another way in which it could be said that society influences (or creates) crime; through direct legislation.When you look at the past criminal legislation in this country one can see that much of it has come about through pressure on the legislature and executive to reflect popular opinion through the law. A good example is the introduction of the Dangerous Dogs Act and the Terrorism Act as a 'knee-jerk' reaction, so to speak, to popular opinion.

Laws based predominantly on morality can also be proof of the theory, such as the laws on incest in the Sexual Offences Act and laws disallowing euthanasia.When a crime is engrained in legislation due to popular opinion does it change when popular opinion changes, for to be able to say that crime is socially constructed surely the crime should change along with the thoughts of society? In a way it could be said that this does happen but in relation to policing rather than legislating. There are many laws that are as good as obsolete in this country and others which are ignored by police and the courts although they have not been repealed by Parliament.One argument for the social constructivist argument could be taken from Ashworth's discussion on the problems that are to be found in communities (as opposed to the state) being responsible for crime and it's prevention. He expresses the fear that if local areas were left to their own devices then there would be the development of a large number of areas each with their own and different laws and methods of punishment due to the different beliefs and moralities of different groups of people.This would surely only happen if crime truly were guided by social factors.

It could be argued that the converse of the essay title is true; that criminal legislation actually shapes the views of society. As a hypothetical example, the legislature may enact a law banning incest because of the inherent health risks involved for the children resulting from such relationships. When society hears of the law they may view that incest is not allowed because it is inherently wrong.A similar argument may be made for the heightened age of sexual consent for homosexuals. Whether it can be said that crime is a social construct may also rely on the political make-up of a society. For example, in a democratic society it could be seen why the law would tend towards the will of society because it is in the best interest of the Government to keep the voting public at ease by acknowledging their views on what should and shouldn't constitute a crime.

However, in a totalitarian or extreme dictatorship regime there may be little incentive or need to reflect the opinions of society. There are, seemingly situations in which the phenomenon of crime in a society may not be a social construct and if that is the case it would be untrue to say that all crimes are socially constructed. However, there is weight in Grady's argument that the influence the public can have on the police culture and activity and on the legislature can result in crime being defined in accordance with that influence.This may be true with a vast amount of the law. Grady certainly does not seem to be saying (or implying) that she does not believe this statement although neither does she expressly agree with it.

But an argument and thought process can be extracted from her work which does indeed tend to support the idea purported in this essay title. I would say that perhaps the answer to the question is that Grady's chapter tends to support the idea that crimes can be socially constructed but does not necessarily support the view that the phenomenon of crime is.