欢迎来到留学生英语论文网

客服信息

我们支持 澳洲论文代写 Assignment代写、加拿大论文代写 Assignment代写、新西兰论文代写 Assignment代写、美国论文代写 Assignment代写、英国论文代写 Assignment代写、及其他国家的英语文书润色修改代写方案.论文写作指导服务

唯一联系方式Q微:7878393

当前位置:首页 > 论文范文 > Sociology

How Do Social Welfare Institutions and Criminal Justice Institutions Threaten People's Identity?

发布时间:2017-03-15
该论文是我们的学员投稿,并非我们专家级的写作水平!如果你有论文作业写作指导需求请联系我们的客服人员

How do social welfare institutions and criminal justice institutions threaten people’s identity? Discuss through Goffman and Foucault?

Introduction

The work of Foucault and Goffman is at large based around the relationship of the individuals in regards institutions and social structures. Both of the theorists work has focused on analyzing the effects of numerous institutions and how they impact on people along with observing the individuals reactions. Society holds five rough ideas of institutions. Firstly, we have institutions that provide care to those who are powerless and undisruptive. Secondly, there are establishments who offer care to those who are a threat to the community along with being unable to look after themselves. A third institution is organizations that are developed to protect society against deliberate dangers. The fourth available institution is an establishment available to those who want to better themselves in order to pursue work life tasks in order to justify themselves. And finally institutions available for those who desire to draw back from society for example monasteries or convents.

This essay will be based around the extensive and critical work of Goffman and Foucault. The first section of this essay will focus on Goffman’s view on social welfare institutions and criminal justice institutions followed by the second section focusing on Foucault’s opinion and how each theorist’s ideas can have the power to threaten individual’s identity. In conclusion to this essay I will relate much of the research to a case that is relevant to social care.

Main Body

Foucault holds a significant view that power is acquired within a group of people or institutions which is only related with constraining and oppressing. The aim of his work is to alter the thoughts surrounding power as ‘repression of the powerless by the powerful’ to where power is seen as a daily operation between people and institutions. Foucault has created important view points on how social reality works.

According to Foucault:

'There are no relations of power without resistances; the latter are all the more real and effective because they are formed right at the point where relations of power are exercised'

(Foucault 1980: 142).

In Foucauldian terms truth has been described as: ‘Standard handed to us by the society we live in and determining the way we see the world’ (Willem 2012). Foucault was spellbound by the power of prison surveillance. His study included psychology, criminology and medicine and how as a whole define the norms of deviance and behaviour. Individuals are dominated and made perform in specific ways as ‘a microism of social control of the wider population, through what he called ‘bio-power’ (Gaventa, 2003).

Foucault creates attention towards the importance of knowledge around an individual’s history and personal conditions which are vital throughout the sentencing process. ‘It is the certainty of being punished and not the horrifying spectacle of public punishment that must discourage crime’ (Foucault, 1991) Punishment within institutions according to Foucault should not occur in the same manner as it will not have the same effect on different people. He often refers to this concept as the ‘rule of optimal specification’ where individualisation is put in place in harmony with each individual’s state of affairs (Foucault, 1991).

In order to attend to the needs of individuals within institutions Foucault holds the perception of normalisation where the individual will become efficient or ‘docile’ through disciplinary punishment (Foucault, 1991). His theory focused on being corrective rather than threatening people’s identity through punishment. Each individual should hold measureable goals with specific training in order to reach these goals.

His theory would not have become evident without the model of supervision (Ryan 2008). Within prisons and hospitals supervision can be seen dating back to the 19th century in order to develop a greater knowledge surrounding both patients and criminals (Ryan, 2008) In order to correct the destructive ways Foucault believed there is a need for constant discreet supervision, ‘eyes that must see without being seen’ (Ryan 2008). Within institutions Foucault believed placing each inmate on observation would create a disciplined individual (Ryan, 2008).

Patients who are considered to be mentally ill can be a result in a chemical imbalance in the brain due to a traumatic childhood experience with the only cure being drugs or therapy in order to restore the chemical balance (Foucault, 1999). Foucault identifies such treatments that threatened the welfare of inmates during the 18th century (Foucault, 1999). Blood transfusions were often given to patients, the immersion into cold water in order to shock the patient, chaining patients up along with electric shock therapy. Segregated institutions such as leper houses were developed in the 12th century in order to segregate people who suffered the infectious leprosy disease (Foucault, 1999).

Focuses was placed on the period of liberalisation where people were no longer mal treated due to their mental illness rather they were provided with more care (Foucault, 1999). Foucault argues that this improvement in conditions is major. There was no longer punishment due to the patient’s actions but rather it organised punishment to improve behaviours (Foucault, 1999).

Any one person undertaking research regarding the subject of welfare has found it difficult in not referring to Foucault’s work. He has formulated evidence that asserts welfare dominating primarily through exploitive means of power that can potentially prohibit and oppress citizens. According to Foucault power to the citizens is the first incentive to seek and simulate ranging capabilities instead of imposing boundaries. Welfare states operate in two manners by catering for citizens in totality and as individuals.

It looks at them as whole when citizens are in question to schooling and national health programmes as universal taxes are obligatory. In contrast there is also a division of citizens into groups who are students, unemployed or a risk group. Welfare state is individualising as it begins looking at the individual’s self image, psychological constitution or personality. His understanding of the individualising technique is of resemblance to the Christian church’s method in guiding those in the direction of escape such as self examination or confession.

Goffman

The work of Goffman can be linked to any total institution including those that hold associations with the criminal justice system. Goffman portrays every institution having surrounding tendencies (Moyer 2001). His overall outlook of the institution is symbolized around the social interaction with the outside world, such as high walls, barbed wire, cliffs, water, locked doors (Moyer 2001).

Goffman described the livelihood inside state mental hospitals within the booked he wrote called ‘Asylums’ Goffman states that mental health hospitals are known as ‘total institutions’. This is where a patient ‘is cut off from society for appreciable periods of time and required to lead a regimented life’ (Goffman, 1961). Each aspect of life takes place in the same building under the same authority figure. Every day activities take place in the presence of a large group of others. Various activities are established in order to create a rational plan to satisfy the institutions aims (Goffman, 1961). Lives within asylums are often controlling causing patients to lose capacity to react independently along with undermining the person’s capability in the outside world. In the eyes of staff members a ‘good’ patient is one who is ‘undermining, docile and obedient’ (Goffman, 1961). Overall mental institutions lower patients self esteem while emphasizing both inadequacies and failures. In order to hinder patients return into society, the use of the medical model approach is used to deal with emotional issues as it encourages the patient to believe they are in need of help (Goffman, 1961).

Goffman defines a criminal justice institution as:

a place of residence and work where a large number of like situated individuals, cut off from the wider society for an appreciable period of time, together lead an enclosed, formally administered round of life’.

(Goffman, 1961)

The inmates lives are referred to by Goffman (1961) as his or her ‘moral career’, he also states that the ‘regular sequence of changes that occur in the persons self and in the framework of imagery for judging himself and others’ (Goffman, 1961, p. 128) Furthermore he associated this chosen career occurring in three basic stages. These stages include the pre-patient stage, inpatient stage and the ex-patient stage (Moyer 2001).

Pre-patient stage is the beginning and the connecting timeframe before the entrance into the institution. This is an important stage as it initiates the process where the inmate will begin to lose or perhaps query the loss of identity (Moyer 2001). Moreover, the inmate will be identified by society as being a failure in meeting smallest amount of values. This includes the conviction or charge of a criminal offence. Despite societies values that the individual been accused of or has broken, the inmate soon re-evaluates themselves. This has been referred to as the ‘disintegrative re-evaluation’ (Goffman 1961, p.123)

The inpatient stage is known as the second career for the inmate. Within this period the inmate is now resident within the institution. According to Goffman, all inmates experience a related state of affairs on admission (Moyer 2001). This includes the loss of freedom, numerous rights, majority of possessions such as clothes and relationships all in which are characteristically associated with identity. Goffman (1961) related this process as the ‘loss of one’s identity kit. The inmate is forced to live alongside a group of inmates provided with minute privacy. Such situations can exemplify a remarkable loss in personal identity compared to the free world where individuals hold choice in abandoning painful circumstances (Moyer 2001).

The final stage is known as the ex patient stage and is the timeframe subsequent to discharge (Goffman 1961). Assuming this phase would be related to celebration, it is paradoxical as the individual’s identity has become irreversibly altered. They have accepted society’s opinions of them (Moyer 2001). Inmates obtain limited contact with the outside world of the walls. In an explicitly Goffmanian outlook, the “outside” world is generally referred to as the history of the earlier relations the individuals were concerned with (Moyer 2001). The staffs are social integrated into the outside world, but both the staff and inmates hold a narrow stereotypical view on each other. Inmates can feel accountable, responsible, substandard and feeble.

Social mobility is largely restricted between both the staff and inmates; therefore distance is typically good and often officially prearranged (Myles, 1978). The role of the guard is to be in command of contact of the inmates and higher staff members. The passage of information also restricted especially the information regarding the staff plans for the inmates. This shows how the inmates are barred from decisions made on their behalf (Myles, 1978). Previous restrictions mentioned are undertaken in order to sustain the aggressive stereotypes.

The reason for the distanced division between the staff and inmates is according to Goffman ‘a major implication of the bureaucratic management of large blocks of persons’ (Myles, 1978). They have their day to day essential needs set in a scheduled routine. Within some institutions inmates can be used in a sense of slavery. Individuals who were work orientated in the outside world are more likely to become discouraged by the institutions work system regardless of too much or too little work provided (Myles, 1978).

Criminal justice institutions uphold and generate tension between the institutional world and the home world whilst being persistent with this tension and using it strategically with the management of inmates (Myles, 1978). On entering the institution they are undressed from their stable social arrangements once received in the home world. An alteration of how they perceive themselves soon occurs as they may feel humiliated, embarrassed and degraded. According to Goffman this reaction is standard (Myles, 1978). The placement of barriers within institutions is the first restriction of self.

When entering a criminal justice institution deliberately they have in some measure retreated from their home world (Myles, 1978). When stripped from their usual appearance and possessions, replacements must be established. The individual is put through a series of degrading ceremonies in order to erase his previous identity whilst providing him with a current identity which is comparable to his institutional position (Myles, 1978). The substitute possessions given to the inmate are clearly identified as the institute’s belongings for example a pencil. Imprisoned prostitutes are faced with: ‘A shower officer who forces them to undress, takes their own clothes away, sees to it that they take showers and get their prison clothes’(Myles, 1978).

Loss of identity restrains the inmate from representing their usual self image to others. In relation to personal defacement that arises from the removal of one’s identity, there is also personal disfigurement due to mutilations of the body for example the loss of limbs (Goffman, 1961). Although this is found in few institutions, a loss in personal safety can lead to anxieties regarding disfigurement. Shock therapy or beatings can lead to many inmates feeling the provided surroundings are not guaranteeing their physical integrity (Goffman, 1961). Facts and information around the inmate’s social status and past behaviour are documented and made available to members of staff (Goffman, 1961).

Case Study

St Patricks Institution dates back to the 1850’s. It has the capacity for 217 beds. In 2009 the inmate average was a total of 221 (The Irish Independent, 2013). It is a closed medium security prison that is managed by the Irish Prison Service. It is situated adjacent to Mount Joy Prison in Dublin, Ireland (The Irish Independent, 2013).

The head of the Irish prison Service stated that ‘the safety and security of offenders cannot be guaranteed at the institution’. This was evident by the dirty walls of cells which needed painting and the lack of satisfactory furniture. The Irish Independent (2013) stated that recurring evidence cropped up surrounding the non- compliance in relation to the best practice and breaches of the fundamental rights of the institutes inmates (The Irish Independent, 2013). On entry into the institute inmates were undressed and placed in garments that can be compared to a poncho (The Irish Independent, 2013). This style of treatment was also evident through Goffman’s writing in ‘Asylums’.

Reports made by a prison ‘watchdog’ discovered inmates who refused to voluntarily remove their clothes for the institute’s staffs were often by force stripped (RTE, 2012). In some circumstances staff members would remove their clothes with the use of a knife to cut them off. These actions were ‘degrading and a form of punishment, intimidation and abuse’ (RTE, 2012). Major concerns regarding the prisons healthcare and education systems were raised, as well as the use of restraint and control techniques. Medical issues and referrals to hospital were often delayed for hours or days which had the potential of carrying serious risks (RTE, 2012).

Numerous staff in St. Patricks was not satisfactorily trained in order to care for young criminals (RTE, 2012). Bed clothing was more than often not changed after previous occupancy. Reports say ‘the bed clothes were dirty, the toilet was blocked and there was no running water’ (RTE, 2012). Inmates who had been on ‘protection’ were locked up for at least 23 hours per day. Inmates who had dealings under the disciplinary procedure were prohibited to access visits from family members, which is opposing to European rules for prisons (RTE, 2012).

All prisons have issues around illegal drugs and contraband. St Patricks was evidently the worst as most illegal substances were thrown over the walls of the institution (RTE, 2012). Inmates did not have the capacity to organise activities due to the lack of available equipment (The Irish Independent, 2013).

In July 2013 it was confirmed that St. Patrick’s institution had been closed down. St Patrick’s institution catered for young male offenders between the ages of 17 and 21. The institution had been criticised repeatedly by human rights bodies as it was unconstitutional. On the closure of the institute all remaining inmates were to be transferred to different institutions within the space of six months where they were guaranteed secure and safe custody. Minister for Justice Alan Shatter describe these findings as ‘shocking and the government would not tolerate the type of abuse outlined in many reports’ (RTE, 2012)

Conclusion

In conclusion, when returning to the outside world some roles on behalf of the inmate may be re-established but it is also evident that other losses can occur and can be experienced in a painful manner, i.e. rearing of children. In Goffman’s opinion the penalty of institutionalisation is overwhelming. The inmate is uncovered of their personal identity without a way of escape. All territories of the self are dishonoured. Mixing ethnic, age and racial groups within prison can lead an inmate feeling tainted with contact from detrimental inmates. Foucault’s work is based on the alterations in relation to individuals and institutions, the family and the government. Much of his research is based on identity and the individual.

References

  1. Bevir, M (1999) ‘Political studies; Foucault, Power and institutions’ Vol 47, issue 2, 345-359
  2. Explore RTE, (2012) ‘Human Rights of St Patricks prisoners ‘ignored or violated’ last accessed: 20th Nov 2014 Available at: RTE.ie
  3. Foucault, M. (1991). ‘Discipline and Punish: the birth of a prison’ London, Penguin.
  4. Gaventa, J (2003) ‘Foucault: Power is everywhere’ accessed on: 2nd Nov 2014 available at: http://www.powercube.net/other-forms-of-power/foucault-power-is-everywhere/
  5. Goffman, E (1961) ‘Asylums; essays on the social situation of metal health patients and other inmates’ United States; Anchor Books.
  6. Moyer, I (2001) ‘Criminology theories: Traditional and non traditional voices and themes’ Sage publications: London
  7. Meyer N.M & Villadsen K (2013) ‘Power, citizenship and social welfare; Understanding citizens ecounters with state welfare’ Routledge; New York; Pgs 10-29
  8. Ryan, E (2008) ‘A critical analyses of the main manifestations of the criminal justice system and the principles that underlie the current Irish system’ accessed: 6th November 2014, available at: http://corkonlinelawreview.com/editions/2008/2008_COLR_112.pdf
  9. The Irish Independent (2013) ‘Prison service closes centre for young offenders’ Last accessed: 20th Nov 2014, Available at: Independant.ie
  10. Willem, V.D.V (2012) ‘The social reality of truth. Foucault, Searle and the role of truth within social relaity’ http://www.academia.edu/1935184/The_Social_Reality_of_Truth._Foucault_Searle_and_the_role_of_truth_within_social_reality

1

上一篇:返回列表 下一篇:The Impact of Economic, Political and Cultural Globalization on the Island State of Mauritius’