Marxism and Functionalism Addressing Crime
Introduction
Social growth and development are an entity that encompasses an interplay of dynamic elements to boost performance outliers. Two distinct theories highly affect the incorporation of strategies to alleviate Crime within the community. The different ideologies, including Functionalism and Marxism that profoundly establish a relationship between human behavioral patterns and virtuosity (Inankul and Hudayi 227). Functionalism establishes that a society is a multidimensional phenomenon whose advancement depends on coordination among all stakeholders. Marxism indicates that capitalism is an essential factor within the populace since it asserts the balance between the rich and the laborers. According to the Marxism framework, the significance of commercialism is the provision of opportunities to workers to equally accumulate wealth akin to the employers. The two structures foster an in-depth overview regarding solving Crime among the inhabitants. Marxism and Functionalism prominently explore the effect of Crime based on the imbalance in the distribution of resources among individuals.
Functionalism and Marxism focus on unequivocally the basis of the increase in crimes within a society due to the distinct interpretation of the laws. Punishment among law offenders is an issue that faces dynamic controversies due to the subjective interpretation of the moral and legal clauses. Over the decades, imprisonment played a vital role in enclosing criminals in secluded areas and persists in the mandate despite imminent problems, such as overcrowding, corruption, and juvenile sentencing. Researchers indicate that overcrowding in jails proficiently includes African Americans, hence assessing the core factor attributed to the increased population of felonious individuals (Labrecque et al. 13). The sole purpose of the penitentiary enshrines offering the person an opportunity to rethink and change the behavior for the better and harmonious living among people.
Juvenile’s Corporal Punishment
Over the decades, the major controversy lies in the debate about corporal punishment among juveniles. At least nineteen U.S states allow the practice to enhance the discipline of children during the learning process. These regions mainly include Alabama, Louisiana, Arizona, Indiana, Missouri, Georgia, Arkansas, Kansas, Florida, Colorado, Idaho, Kentucky, and Mississippi (Heilbrun et al. 5). The issue poses a legal challenge based on the child’s exposure to unhealthy growth and development due to the inflicted stress and depression. Therefore, abolishing the mainframe entails the protection of the juvenile against the profound threat of mental pressure.
Juveniles can waive their constitutional rights in the same way as adults. Different statutory laws protect teenagers during the waiver process. One of the laws is the right to the limited essence of due process. It is evident from the Kent versus the United States case that the individual was granted the submission and treatment as an adult criminal case (Heilbrun et al. 6). It is a phenomenon that renders a child an opportunity in court to defend their actions. Another construct is the right to counsel, which enhances the representation and the chance of winning the case through the presented factual line (Abram et al. 118). It is important to consider the right to confront the witnesses to assert the events that led to the Crime the teen is accused of. The person also enjoys the right to notify charges during the arrest to ascertain the justification for detention and harassment. Although a juvenile can waive the rights, the individual has the right against exposing the self to a particular criminal act.
Blended sentencing refers to the merging of juvenile and adult punishments, hence boosting discipline and character change. The teenager is served the juvenile sentencing first, and the lack of compliance renders the determination of adult sentencing. The different types of blended sentencing include juvenile-inclusive, exclusive, criminal-inclusive, criminal-exclusive, and juvenile-contiguous (Abrams et al. 120). The determination of punishment for the adolescent relies on the type of court. Therefore, juvenile sentencing applies in juvenile court for the accused contrary to the adults’ proceedings. Another factor that determines the category for adaptation is the punishment options for the individual. In this case, there is a profound disparity in the determination of ruling for blended sentencing aiming to ensure the social welfare of the accused.
The predisposition report is a construct with profound details of the historical behavior of a juvenile. Human behavior and character highly influence the nature of relations and engagements. Therefore, it is crucial to derive the documentation as an approach to justify the acts of an individual under different circumstances and empower employers with insight regarding the trends of conduct. The three main disposition options available to the juvenile court judge include house placement, probation, and suspended judgments. The three platforms significantly impact a person’s habits in younger years through dynamic insights (Heilbrun et al. 8). These insights include rehabilitation, skill development, and focusing on crucial treatment strategies. Apart from the self-development goals, the procedures render a proficient baseline and justification of the public safety and implementation of a program fostering the integration of community developmental projects.
One of the significant challenges in the criminal justice system is the determination of certain sentencing for individuals. On the one hand, it is essential to incorporate measures that foster uprightness for the victims. On the other hand, there is a controversy regarding the measure of punishment for the offender. The central aspect involves approving the situations that demand death sentencing while other circumstances impose an alternative standard. Multiculturalism establishes that the primary responsibility of individuals involves upholding dynamic and apt moral codes. Therefore, it is challenging for policing institutions, including the legal systems, to justify propositions regarding life or death for certain lawbreakers. The penalty for hanging among the guilty is an issue that fosters the deterrence of certain habits and usually in three facets, namely specific, retribution, and general. The researcher argues that the implementation of the strategy relies on the accountability of the leadership to the citizens (Chen 4). An excellent example is that most European countries abolished the policy without concern for the public domain’s security. However, it is difficult in the U.S to extenuate the concept while incorporating the well-being of the nationalities.
Death Sentence Controversy
The main argument lies in incorporating death sentencing as a deterrent measure against certain criminal offenses. Researchers indicate no significant relationship between the two components: deterrence and the death penalty (Chen 5). Historically, the U.S government implemented the policy for certain felonies, such as large-scale trafficking of drugs, attempted murder of a witness, treason, murders, and espionage. However, the administrative officers lacked the necessity for the scheme and replaced the concept with life imprisonment. Killing a transgressor enhances the emergence of new players in the game due to the developed opportunity. Although the situation threatened the populace about the approach against ideological appeals, it is a condition that intensified the re-invention of strategies in lawbreaking. Therefore, death sentencing is a situation that threatens the philosophical interpretation of humanity cause of the lack of relevance to the main impact of deterrence.
In a different spectrum, institutions focus on alternatives over the permanent solution on impeding as the major resolution to criminal activities. One of the aspects is the integration of philosophical approaches that optimize community engagement and rejuvenation of a problematic system (Sarat et al. 757). Different entities foster the participation of society in the implementation of policies promoting the rehabilitation process.
Impact of Sociological Practices
Public opinion plays a crucial role in the implementation process of a policy due to the necessity to address divergent viewpoints. Strategies that aim at improving the growth and development of a region rely on the ability of the individuals’ endorsement. An excellent example of an approach is incorporating a community-based intervention to enhance the rehabilitation of criminal offenders (Sarat et al. 757). It is an initiative that requires coordination among stakeholders to boost the performance outlier. On the one hand, guidelines establish the marginal expectation from particular interdependent theoretical frameworks. On the other hand, the mainframe reflects the optimal contribution by all parties. According to Seigafo, the development of participatory asset mapping requires the optimal engagement of different people within a region to enhance the collection of crucial information (2). The mapping process reflects the profound impact of establishing action plans that boost the quality of service. Sustainable growth and development depend on integrating certain initiatives that enhance the relationship-building among dynamic participants while elevating the impact of social equity.
Proficiency in social work is a multidimensional phenomenon that requires acquiring advanced knowledge and skills during the interaction. The expertise enshrines such facets as communication, cultural competence, organization, critical thinking, active listening, and advocacy. Primarily, it is crucial for the personnel to establish relations with the community members to enhance the gathering of vital details regarding the welfare and the challenges affecting growth and development (Seigafo 3). Different ethnic groups foster various customs and norms, hence establishing a functional framework improving the recognition and appreciation of dynamic perspectives. Diversity is a platform that ensures sharing of information and strategies regarding equity and effectiveness in service delivery through the programs.
The cognitive growth of a child highly depends on the nature of the environment. The structuring of the surrounding for the infant fosters the development of a morally upright character. Social learning is a framework that demonstrates the significance of functionalism theory within the community. The main reason for the incorporation of the approach entails appreciating optimal coordination among all entities to enhance the emergence of a healthy and safe habitat (Wagner et al. 44). Poor lifestyle behavior attributes to the increase in criminal activities due to the destructive relational mindset. Therefore, it is crucial for dynamic institutions to implement policies that promote the participation of all parties. Apart from the responsive behavioral approach, unhealthy emotional development negatively affects the physical well-being of the individuals.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is the responsibility of different stakeholders to establish institutions that advocate social equality. The unequivocal approach established by Marxism and Functionalism indicates a dynamic impact in handling juvenile sentencing. In this case, it is crucial to implement strategies that enhance coordination among the different parties to advance healthy community growth and development. Discordance fosters the ineffective fight against Crime due to the misinterpretation of dynamic perspectives on morality and virtuosity.
Works Cited
Abrams, Laura S., Sid P. Jordan, and Laura A. Montero. “What is a juvenile? A cross-national comparison of youth justice systems.” Youth Justice 18.2 (2018): 111-130. Web.
Chen, Daniel L. “The deterrent effect of the death penalty? Evidence from British commutations during World War I.” Evidence from British Commutations during World War I (2017). Web.
Heilbrun, Kirk, et al. Evaluating juvenile transfer and disposition: Law, science, and practice. Taylor & Francis, 2017. Web.
Inankul, Hakan, and Hudayi Sayin. “An evaluation on crime and crime theories.” Public Administration and Public Finance Research (2021): 227. Web.
Labrecque, Ryan M., et al. “Reforming solitary confinement: The development, implementation, and processes of a restrictive housing step down reentry program in Oregon.” Health & Justice 9.1 (2021): 1-15. Web.
Sarat, Austin, et al. “The rhetoric of abolition: Continuity and change in the struggle against America’s death penalty, 1900-2010.” Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 107 (2017): 757. Web.
Seigafo, Sheldon. “Inmate’s right to rehabilitation during incarceration: A critical analysis of the United States correctional system.” International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences 12.2 (2017). Web.
Wagner, Jessica, et al. “Intergenerational transmission of domestic violence: Practitioners’ perceptions and experiences of working with adult victims and perpetrators in the UK.” Child Abuse Review 28.1 (2019): 39-51. Web.