I would argue that these two theories are compatible based on a simple analysis of both.
In essence, Hirschi's social control theory states that societal bonds are the mechanism that prevents people from pursuing the rewards offered by a life of crime. These bonds consist of attachment (emotional connections that we share with people), the commitments that we make to building and sustaining relationships with others, our involvement with work-related and social activities, and our beliefs in right and wrong. When combined, according to social control theory, these factors keep members of society in check.
According to A General Theory of Crime (1990), crime is the result of a blend of opportunity and low self-esteem. An unstable or difficult childhood creates a breeding ground for the development of criminal tendencies, according to this theory.
From a sociological perspective, it is evident that if one has a bad childhood, one is less likely to find it easy to form the types of social bonds described by social control theory. Without these social bonds, according to Hirschi, it would be easier to cast away moral scruples and enter a life of crime.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Travis-Hirschi
Hirschi's (1969) social control theory posits that people who are delinquents did not form social bonds to society consisting of attachment, belief, commitment, and involvement. Following a Hobbesian viewpoint, Hirschi believes that all humans are capable of committing crimes and that conformity, rather than delinquency, has to be explained. Through the process of socialization, he believes that people form bonds with society, which includes attachment—the link between people and society. Other elements of social bonds include commitment—the time and energy or investment that someone has made in societal institutions. For example, someone who has earned a college degree might be less likely to violate societal norms. Involvement is the third aspect of social bonds, as people who have more structured time that connects them to others are less likely to commit crimes. Belief refers to the degree to which people believe in social norms and are therefore more likely to follow them.
Gottfredson and Hirschi's (1990) general theory of crime postulates that people's degree of self-control explains a person's likelihood to commit or refrain from crime (see the link below for additional information). When a person with the propensity to commit crimes encounters the opportunity to commit a crime, they are more likely to do so. The researchers believe that children raised in situations in which they are not well monitored by adults, in which they are not attached to their parents, and in which the parents encourage criminal behavior, will develop less self-control. People with this orientation are often focused on the present and want to gain rewards without work.
These two theories are to some degree incompatible. Hirschi's (1969) social control theory posits that parents do not need to have direct control over their children but can exercise a kind of indirect control. From this early theory, it follows that even if parents are not present, they can exercise a form of psychological control over their children. However, Hirschi abandoned this idea in the later general theory of crime that he developed with Gottfredson in 1990. The general theory of crime states that parents must monitor their children directly so that the children develop self-control and an orientation for eventual rather than immediate results. The earlier theory states that children can develop some of this connection and self-control on their own while the parents exercise indirect control, while the later theory states that parents must be present and actively instilling values and practices of self-control in their children to encourage law-abiding behavior.
Source:
Wiatrowski, M.D., Griswold, D.B., & Roberts, M.K. "Social Control Theory and Delinquency." American Sociological Review Vol. 46, No. 5 (Oct., 1981), pp. 525-541 Published by: American Sociological Association DOI: 10.2307/2094936.
https://oxfordre.com/criminology/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264079-e-252
No comments:
Post a Comment