Question 1
Biosocial criminology cannot lead to oppressive and inhumane crime-control policies since it combines information across various fields of study in order to create cohesive perspective to study the relationship of crime and criminals (Beaver and Walsh, 2011). This means that by studying how the genetic influences play a major role in the formation of the anti-social behavior, can lead to effective crime control policies to deter crimes in the future. Several behavioral genetic studies of antisocial behaviours have shown how the study of mild forms of aggression can lead to deviant forms of criminal behavior of a person. It is the genetic revolution and other genetic factors which can predict and explain the criminal behaviour (Beaver and Walsh, 2011). It is guaranteed that experts use the biological traits that distinguish the offenders from non-offenders by considering how genetics blends with social factors to prevent the criminal tendencies of a person. Hence, biosocial criminology cannot lead to the implementation of oppressive and inhumane crime-control policies. In fact, there is a scientific explanation justifies the theory that criminality is rooted within the bodies of the offenders (Lilly, Ball and Cullen, 2011).
The first viewpoint that will be able to provide a logical explanation for the origin of the criminal mind has a close connection to the biosocial perspective in the form of brains, genetics and biological traits of a person at birth. These are the major factors that will influence an individual to commit a crime. Based on the Positivism Theory, the theory supposes that the offender is mentally sick. This theory is focused on the idea that such person is suffering from mental illness, and the situation is not a choice of the offender. The best approach to cure mental illness is by placing the offender in a mental facility for his treatment, and to deter future crimes through early intervention. At the same time, the Theory of Nurture explains that the offender suffered from possible traumatic childhood experiences in the past. As a result, the behavior of a person is intimately relation to his childhood background and past experiences. Using the biosocial perspective will analyze how a criminal is nurtured or lacks proper guidance that led him to become a full-grown offender. In addition, social influences are considered essential contributors that entice the offender to activate his criminal mind. Thus, it can be concluded that the criminal behavior does not only cover life-changing experiences of the offender during his early childhood throughout adulthood. Aside from this genetics, environmental effects and lack of social interaction shall trigger a person’s criminal tendencies. Therefore, there is no possibility that biosocial criminology may lead to oppressive, and inhumane crime-control policies since the genetics and behaviour of the offender are considered.
Question 2
Drug treatment courts (DTC) are widely viewed as effective diversion programs for drug-involved offenders. Drug treatment courts are considered a form of therapeutic jurisprudence that falls under the more general modern rubric of problem-solving courts (Brown, 2011). These courts have been regarded as the most significant criminal justice initiative in the present century. The basic rationale behind drug treatment courts holds that individuals commit crime due to mental illness or psychosocial dysfunction that lead an offender to develop his criminal behavior. The drug treatment courts are intended to cure underlying illness or dysfunction through the provision of treatment services that shall be supervised by the courts (Brown, 2011).
The advantage of specialized drug courts has shown that drug court participation is associated with reduced recidivism and drug use among substance-involved criminals (Brown, 2011). At the same time, the participants of a drug court have lower rate of becoming repeat offenders, compared to those who do not undergo such kind of program. Based on the study of Brown (2011), the drug treatment court sample had attained a lower recidivism rate and longer time to commit a new crime. At the same time, some of the groups that have the probability of higher risk for reducing criminal behavior was shown, after the offenders have undergone the drug treatment court. This was revealed in the case of minorities, where majority of them are African-American, and those offenders having more extensive criminal history. Enhanced effectiveness for drug court was also shown from the sample population among women and among older individuals (Brown, 2011). The results of the study of Brown (2011) revealed that the current results when compared to drug court participants to other groups who support the effectiveness of drug treatment court in reducing recidivism.
Specialized courts such as drug courts, have the goal of restoring the offenders to a constructive place in society by providing adequate treatment and therapy (Brown, 2011). I consider the drug courts’ objective is for rehabilitation of the offenders. Rehabilitation is considered as an important goal to be achieved even though there is a fixed sentence imposed to the drug offenders Treating drug dependence can serve as deterrence for future crimes. Reformation should be the goal of the drug courts in order to help the offenders to take a second chance at life after undergoing psychological and mental treatment to solve their problems and return to the community as reformed citizens. Recent studies have shown that drug treatment courts are effective. This can be attributed to the rehabilitation theory which is meant to benefit the offenders. Brown (2011) stated that mental illness is highly prevalent among drug dependent populations. Aside from this, studies show that mental illness presence or severity have to be considered to provide a more effective treatment for the drug abusers.
Most of the drug-related offenses occur in poor communities. In fact, these communities have access to drugs on the streets and majority of homeless congregates. Studies show that drug users can be similarly compared to other alcohol users since the usage may range frequently. People who are not alcoholic resort to engage in drug-related activities, since drugs have more chemical dependency compared to alcohol. Drug historians believe that the result of drug dependence is based on a two-tiered culture between middle class users and the rising number of low-income users (Brown, 2011). The report has shown that drug dependence usually occurs among those who are unemployed and high school dropouts. The statistical breakdown revealed that a career and education status will reduce drug use among the educated Americans. The drug trial court offers services such as substance abuse treatments and anger management counseling. According to Black (2011), the findings of their study indicated that enhanced drug court effectiveness for the higher risk subgroup such as the minorities, which will require further investigation and discussion.
References:
Beaver, K.M. and Walsh, A. (2011). The Ashgate Research Companion to Biosocial Theories of
Crime. Surrey: Ashgate.
Brown, R. (2011). Drug Court Effectiveness: A Matched Cohort Study in the Dane County Drug
Treatment Court. Journal Of Offender Rehabilitation, 50(4), 191-201.
Cole, G. and Gertz, M. (2013). The Criminal Justice System, 10th ed. OH: Cengage.
Lilly, J. R., Ball, R. A. and Cullen, F.T. (2011). Criminology Theory: Contact and
Consequences. California: Sage Publications.
