Constructing Deviance Adler and Adler - PowerPoint by 0FGe9ais

VIEWS: 33 PAGES: 43

									 Part IV
Chapter 21
 Eight boys from white, stable, upper middle-
 class families were among the most
 delinquent – “Saints”
   Parents and community unaware that the
    “saints” were constantly occupied with
    truancy, drinking, wild driving, petty theft,
    vandalism
   None were arrested during two years of
    observation
 Six lower-class white boys, same high school
 but different gang – “Roughnecks”
   These boys constantly in trouble with police
   and community even though rate of
   delinquency about the same as Saints

                                             Part 4: Ch. 21
Part 4: Ch. 21
 Getting out of school as early as possible
 They did so with minimum danger of
 detection through elaborate procedure for
 obtaining “legitimate” release from class
   For example, one boy would ask to use
   bathroom but instead get another boy out of
   another class by saying he was needed for a
   drama rehearsal, the boy released would do
   same for another, etc.



                                            Part 4: Ch. 21
 The boys would then go to car and leave
  school for a day of fun
 On average about five boys would get away
  and this pattern was repeated often
 Once leaving school, they would go to pool
  hall at lower-class side of town or to a café in
  the suburbs where they were unlikely to
  meet people they knew




                                           Part 4: Ch. 21
Part 4: Ch. 21
 They traveled to Big Town - 25 miles from
  their town most Fridays & Saturdays
 Activities included drinking heavily in bars,
  drunk driving, committing acts of vandalism
  & other pranks
 In spite of their activities, the boys managed
  to avoid being stopped by police most of the
  time
 Their activities were surely delinquent but
  they did not see it that way: they were
  merely having a little fun
                                          Part 4: Ch. 21
Part 4: Ch. 21
 Highly successful in school, the Saints had
    “B” averages with two getting straight “As”
   Boys were popular and many held offices
    and played sports
   Teachers and school officials saw them as
    role-models who would “make something of
    themselves”
   Cheating on exams was rampant but
    teachers usually gave them benefit of doubt
   Local police saw boys positively, as among
    leaders of youth in community
   If on rare occasion a boy was stopped by
    police for speeding, they would be polite,
    contrite and plead for mercy: none ever
    received a ticket
                                          Part 4: Ch. 21
Part 4: Ch. 21
       The Roughnecks
 Roughnecks were somewhat “opposite” of
  Saints
 Although boys engaged in equal amounts of
  wild-oat sowing, the not-so-well-dressed, not-
  so-well-mannered, not-so-rich boys were seen
  negatively as heading for trouble
 The Roughnecks were constantly in trouble
  with the police which reinforced
  community’s view of them



                                         Part 4: Ch. 21
        The Roughnecks
 Town’s view of gang delinquency was
 distorted: both groups more or less
 delinquent than community realized
   Fighting activities were readily and
    accurately perceived by everyone
   Engaged in drinking alcohol which town was
    aware of
   More serious was theft which community did
    not realize was as extensive as it was for the
    Roughnecks


                                            Part 4: Ch. 21
       The Roughnecks
 High level of mutual distrust and dislike
 between Roughnecks and police:
   Boys felt strongly that police were unfair and
    corrupt which may have been true
   Main source of boys dislike of police came
    from fact that police would periodically
    harass them
   Police viewed them as engaged in criminal
    activities and saw their job as keeping tabs on
    them and preventing their crimes



                                            Part 4: Ch. 21
Part 4: Ch. 21
 Boys behavior in school not especially
  disruptive - while they would like to have
  avoided it & were unsuccessful, they
  attended regularly
 Some were seen as incapable of meeting
  academic standards
   Teachers, like the community, saw boys
    negatively, as heading for trouble,
    uninterested in making something of
    themselves
   The boys had a “C” averages
   Two of them were good football players
                                             Part 4: Ch. 21
 Why did the community, the school and the
  police react to the Saints as though they
  were good, upstanding, non-delinquent
  youth with bright futures but to the
  Roughnecks as though they were young
  criminals headed for trouble?
 Why did the Roughnecks and the Saints have
  quite different careers after high school,
  careers that for the most part lived up to
  community’s expectations?

                                       Part 4: Ch. 21
 In sheer number of illegal acts, Saints were
 more delinquent and in terms of
 “seriousness” – not much difference :
   The cost of Roughnecks’ stolen property may
    have been slightly higher than the Saints
   Roughnecks more prone to physical violence
    & sought opportunities to fight (sometimes
    each other) whereas Saints never fought
 Yet Saints frequently endangered their own
 and others’ lives in their drunk-driving & in
 some of their pranks – removing traffic or
 construction signs on roadways
                                          Part 4: Ch. 21
 Visibility: differential treatment of groups
 possibly due to fact that one gang was more
 visible than other
   This was a direct function of the economic
    standing of the families
   Saints had cars & could remove themselves
    from community’s view whereas Roughnecks
    didn’t own cars & so could not leave
    community
   As a result, Roughnecks hung around
    downtown & were highly visible
   Saints, on the other hand, could hide their
    time-wasting from community              Part 4: Ch. 21
 Demeanor: another reason for differential
  treatment of two groups
 Different responses of group members to
  outside intervention
   Saints when confronted by police would be
    apologetic and penitent
   The Roughnecks would show hostility and
    disdain




                                          Part 4: Ch. 21
 Bias: Roughnecks were simply seen as
  committed to deviance as a way of life while
  Saints were seen as basically good kids
 What all of this comes down to is class
  structure which favors middle and upper-
  class youth over their lower-class
  counterparts




                                         Part 4: Ch. 21
Part 4: Ch. 21
 Most Saints went to college right after high
  school; 5 graduated in 4 years & two finished
  college a little later after stints in armed
  forces
 Three went to graduate education: law,
  medicine, and a Ph.D.




                                         Part 4: Ch. 21
 Two Roughnecks who played football
  received scholarships to college, both
  graduated and became high school
  teachers/coaches
 Two other Roughnecks didn’t graduate high
  school & both eventually went to prison for
  murder
 Another Roughneck became (illegal)
  bookmaker for gambling


                                        Part 4: Ch. 21
Part 4: Ch. 21
 The community responded to Roughnecks as
 boys in trouble and the boys embraced this
 view
  Their pattern of delinquency was reinforced &
   departure from it became unlikely
  As the boys acquired self-image as deviants,
   they sought new friends who affirmed that
   identity
  As that self-conception became more
   entrenched, they became more willing to try
   new & more extreme deviance

                                          Part 4: Ch. 21
 Their alienation resulted in more expression
  of disrespect & hostility toward teachers,
  police and others; in turn this increased
  community’s negativism, perpetuating entire
  process
 College scholarships for two Roughnecks
  helped to break this cycle by providing new
  basis for self-identity & interactions with
  others
 Likewise, Saints were viewed as good kids
  who would make something of themselves
  which happened for the most of them
                                        Part 4: Ch. 21
 What was cause and result of this disparity
  between the Saints and the Roughnecks?
 Could the explanation for the different
  reactions to these two gangs be simply that
  one group of boys was more delinquent than
  the other?




                                         Part 4: Ch. 21
 Part IV
Chapter 22
Part 4: Ch. 22
 Recognized as a privileged caste able to heal
  the sick, a privilege won through difficult
  years of education & exhaustive training
 This honored rank, however, creates
  opportunities for doctors to commit crimes
  within profession
 Attributes connected with medical practice:
   high status, trustworthiness & professional
   autonomy, provide doctors with “protective
   cloak” that shields them from scrutiny


                                           Part 4: Ch. 22
 Doctors’ high status derives from high
  salaries & occupational prestige, enabling
  them to retain elite social positions
 Affords doctors protection necessary to
  commit crime: historically there has been
  reluctance to use criminal law against high
  status offenders




                                           Part 4: Ch. 22
 Altruistic image projected by doctors rooted in
  code of ethics which defines doctors as selfless
  professionals who perform invaluable service
  without regard for personal gain
 Creates assumption of good will that makes it
  hard to prove charge of intentional wrongdoing
  on part of doctor
 Physicians altruistic image engenders trust from
  patients who can become easy targets of fraud or
  to overlook negligent medical care
 This reflects a “pattern of deference” to doctors

                                            Part 4: Ch. 22
 Doctors have been relatively immune to legal
  scrutiny because of medical professions’
  preference for self-regulation
 State medical review boards (typically
  composed of other physicians) are first &
  often only review of doctors’ conduct
 They can discipline & suspend or revoke
  medical licenses
 This may facilitate criminal opportunities by
  shielding its members from more effective or
  harsher punishments


                                         Part 4: Ch. 22
Part 4: Ch. 22
 Kickbacks involve payments from one party
  to another in exchange for referred business
  or other income-producing deals
 Their acceptance by doctors is unethical and
  illegal because of conflict of interest between
  doctors’ commitment to quality patient care
  and their own financial interest




                                          Part 4: Ch. 22
 Fee splitting occurs when one physician (often
  a general practitioner) receives payment from
  a surgeon or other specialist in exchange for
  patient referrals - may result in higher patient
  costs since they have to be shared
 Referral may be based on the largest fee to the
  referring doctor rather than the quality of the
  doctor’s work to whom one is referred



                                            Part 4: Ch. 22
 Self-referrals involve sending patients to
 specialized medical facilities in which the
 physician has a financial interest




                                       Part 4: Ch. 22
 Prescription violations - a few doctors
 overprescribe or mis-prescribe drugs to
 patients which may cause serious illness or
 death




                                            Part 4: Ch. 22
 Unnecessary treatments or surgery may be
  recommended to patients because of the fees the
  doctor will earn and not the well-being of the
  patient
 This can be a very difficult matter to determine
  and opens the door to abuse




                                            Part 4: Ch. 22
 Sexual misconduct - sex may be exchanged
  for professional services
 Doctor’s trust and authority may be used to
  exploit relationship with patient
 Doctors may sexually assault patients when
  under anesthesia




                                        Part 4: Ch. 22
Part 4: Ch. 22
 Medical profession opposed original
  Medicaid legislation in 1960s as a threat to
  their autonomy because program set price of
  medical services
 AMA lobbied against provisions to sanction
  doctors for violating the rules
 As a result doctors billed for duplicate
  services or items not performed
 Many doctors adopted defiant attitude
  toward Medicaid because viewed it as
  illegitimate intrusion on their autonomy
  even though intent was to provide health
  benefits to the poor
                                        Part 4: Ch. 22
 What kinds of retaliatory avenues exist for
  patients who are mistreated or abused by
  physicians?
 How are “deviant” doctors able to avert the
  label and what consequences are faced by
  most?




                                         Part 4: Ch. 22

								
To top