Discussion 1:
Can violence risk be assessed in the same manner for male perpetrators vs. female perpetrators of domestic violence? Can similar assessment instruments be used for male perpetrators and female perpetrators of domestic violence? Do you think that treatment approaches should be the same or different for male perpetrators vs. female perpetrators of domestic violence?
Violence risk assessment should be different between men and women for the obvious reason that men and women have different motivations and capability in committing violence. According to statistics, men are more aggressive and violent than women as evidenced by data from arrests made, reports and convictions. For the same reason, scholars believe that men and women have different tendency and capability in committing domestic violence. Also, assessment instruments should be different between genders. Accordingly to studies, there are different psychological and emotional motivations that influence men and women who display violent behaviors and that these motivations differ greatly between genders. Unlike male perpetrators, women, according to scholars, have certain traits that prevent them from perpetrating crimes.
Feminine traits such as peity, maternity, sexual docility and finess makes them less likely to become aggressive than males. These traits combined with a physique that is not built for muscular strength, then the likelihood of perpetrating violent behavior is very much unlikely. Social scientists and psychologists such as Freud, Lombroso and Ferraro, believe that women commit crimes because of a ‘masculinity complex’ or possessing characteristics of the male . Accordingly, those women who have excessive male characteristics are most likely to become violent and commit crimes. Knowing that there are differences in their psychological, emotional and physical make-up, there must be varied treatment approaches between male and female offenders. Women, for example, experience physiological changes during their menstrual cycle that could affect their psychological and emotional state. These factors as well as other differences between the psychology and physique of male and female offenders must be considered in order to make a more effective and realistic treatment or intervention program.
Discussion 2
Compare and contrast risk assessments for adults vs. school-based youth. Why do you think it is necessary to conduct a much broader assessment for school-based youth?
Psychological studies, especially those who are focused on studying child growth and development, attest that there is a huge difference between the cognitive processes between adults and juveniles, which also affects their ability and tendency to commit delinquent behavior. For the same reason, the risks of committing delinquent behaviors for adults and juveniles are generally assessed through their cognitive ability as supplied by age. Jean Piaget, in his theory of cognitive development, believed that there are different stages in human development from the time the child is born until he or she reaches adulthood. Piaget, identifies four stages of cognitive development which he refers as sensorimotor (0 – 2 yrs. old); preoperational stage (2 – 7 yrs. old); concrete operational (7 – 11yrs. old); and formal operational (11 – 15 yrs. old). For Piaget, between these stages of development, a child has limited cognitive capabilities, which also limits their tendency to conceive and commit certain delinquencies.
Because of their unpredictability as well as the many factors that affect the delinquent behavior of young people, it is desirable that their risk assessments should be broader in perspective. Young people, for example, seek the thrill and excitement that they sometimes find in committing delinquent behavior such as such as hunting, capture, conflict, flight and escape that they usually perform in groups or gangs . Adults, on the other hand, are more contemplative on what they do. According to the theory of reinforcement as well as the social learning theory, adults display a more opportunistic behavior as compared to juveniles; that is, adults tend to do things that would give them the most benefits unlike juveniles who do things as influenced by other factors such as peer pressure and other external influences.
References
Akers, R. (2009). Social Learning and Social Structure: A General Theory of Crime and Deviance. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
Gavigan, S. (n.d.). Women's Crime: New Perspective and Old Theories. Retrieved April 2015, from https://apps.osgoode.yorku.ca/osgmedia.nsf/0/E4DEDBAD1C742887852571B900704402/$FILE/Women's%20Crime%20-%20New%20Perspectives%20and%20Old%20Theories.pdf
Heimer, K., & De Coster, S. (2001). Crime and Gender. Retrieved December 2013, from http://www.lib.unb.ca/: http://www.lib.unb.ca/instruction/bcull/CrimeGenderIESBSArticle.pdf
Kubrin, C. (2009). Social Disorganization Theory: Then, Now, and in the Future. Retrieved February 2015, from https://webfiles.uci.edu: https://webfiles.uci.edu/ckubrin/SD%20Theory-%20Then,%20Now%20and%20in%20the%20Future.pdf?uniq=fn2w4g
McLeod, S. (2012). Jean Piaget. Retrieved April 2015, from http://www.simplypsychology.org/: http://www.simplypsychology.org/piaget.html
Schwartz, J., & Steffensmeier, D. (n.d.). The Nature of Female Offending: Patterns and Explanation. Retrieved December 2013, from http://www.jblearning.com/: http://www.jblearning.com/samples/0763741159/ch2_female_offenders_2e.pdf
Wood, J., & Alleyne, E. (2010). Street gang theory and research: Where are we now and where do we go from here? Retrieved January 2015, from http://www.goccp.maryland.gov/: http://www.goccp.maryland.gov/msac/documents/gang-studies/gang-involvement-theory/Wood-Alleyne-2010.pdf
