Chapter 1: social scientist have argued that issues of inequality, poverty and social exclusion cut across both social welfare and crime control domains, and noted that while some responses to these issues may become the focus of social welfare policies, others may become the focus of crime control interventions.
Social justice then is neither the exclusive terrain of social welfare nor of crime control. The boundaries between these two domains tend to be mobile and porous.
This idea was introduced by arguing that the neat distinction between the goals of social welfare (well being) and the goals of crime control (maintaining social order) break down on closer inspection.
Chapter 1 section 4: crime control measures impact adversely on social welfare and produce justice struggles. State withdrawal from the direct provision of welfare services is accompanied by greater attention to antisocial behaviour of younger and poorer groups in society.
Social welfare is oriented towards the creation and maintenance of social well-being through the provision of various social supports combating social inequalities by promoting redistribution and social inclusion and countering various social harms such as poverty and discrimination.
The domain of crime control is more oriented towards the creation and maintenance of social stability, social order and security by addressing behaviours and activities of those who are perceived to threaten these in some way.
Crime control and social welfare policies, there are many examples of entanglement between them. For example, countering antisocial behaviour may be defined as a social welfare matter in that it protects the welfare and well being of some against the disruptions caused by others. This example also raises wider social welfare questions, I.e how can societies support young people and others so that they do not conduct themselves in ways that are viewed as antisocial?
The relationship between social welfare and crime control is dynamic meaning it is likely to change over time, and it is contested.
Another example of how social welfare and crime control is entangled: protecting children from abuse- a role taken on by both police and social workers, acting in partnership but with rather blurred boundaries between the welfare and crime control functions. The entanglements between welfare and crime control take many different forms.
Welfare states in its traditional form is considered by many commentators across the political spectrum to be in need of reform.
Social scientists focus on creating social inclusion rather than on providing welfare
Ideas about an underclass of marginalised individuals - often black Afro caribbean or Hispanic - have informed policies on crime preventions and crime control in countries such as the USA. Many studies are handing over more responsibility for tackling crime and antisocial behaviour to local communities, who in turn address crime prevention through a mix of welfare and control strategies.
As environmental issues become more important in ensuring security and well-being, so attention is turning to new kinds of harm - harms perpetrated not by those traditionally defined as problem populations, often on the margins of society but by the rich and powerful who perpetuate environmental and other kinds of crime.
Many struggles for social justice, produced laws that have to be enforced through the institutions of criminal justice. On the other hand, some criminal justice measures including many of those now associated with anti terrorist measures are viewed as producing harms such as internment or the loss of rights for certain population groups.
Chapter 1 section 3&6: dissent and protest against social injustice may be the subject or criminalising responses.
The darling study for the Joseph row tree foundation shows an increasing inequality of wealth in the uk in the late 20th century...