Discuss Whether It Is More Effective To Punish

2455 Words10 Pages
Using psychological research to support your answer, discuss whether it is more effective to punish or treat offenders in order to prevent re-offending. Crime is an act or behaviour that breaks the law. However for behaviour to be classed as criminal, it does not necessarily have to break a law. Criminal behaviour can be split into four types, these being legal, moral, social and psychological. The legal view of criminal behaviour refers to an act that breaks the laws of the land and which is punishable under the current legislation and laws. Moral, meaning a behaviour which goes against the norms and values of society, and which deviate from the norms of religion too. This however is seen to be punishable by God. The social side sees the deviant behaviour as violating the values, beliefs and norms of the community. The psychological perspective sees criminal behaviour as a deviant action which causes hurt or discomfort to other people, whilst in exchange gaining a reward for themselves. Each of these views of an undesirable criminal behaviour need a remedy which will reduce or completely stop behaving in such a way again. When someone breaks the law there are two ways of dealing with them, to treat the offender, or to punish them. The aims of both treating and punishing an offender are the same, to prevent further re-offending. However both of these processes function in completely different ways, and some are more effective than others. Punishment has a number of functions, and over the years, this has changed. According to Foucault (1977) punishment in the past was physical and public. When offenders committed a crime against God, the ruler or the person who held the power over the land, they were savagely beaten and punished. This acted as a deterrent, as doing it publicly warned the people watching that if they acted in a similar way, or behaved in a way

More about Discuss Whether It Is More Effective To Punish

Open Document