Tough on Crime is Tough on Crime Victims
Article by Kerry Naughton
“With a few exceptions, governments enact criminal justice legislation for both adults and juveniles without regard to what is likely to be effective in reducing offending. They engage in a curious calculus that is irrelevant to preventing victimization of how much a given responsibility is worth in time behind bars. At election time, they propose even heavier penalties and minimum sentences without any care for what these will cost to taxpayers and offenders or what little difference they will make to reducing victimization. Somehow they assume that enacting a penalty and empowering courts to impose it will reduce crime. Nothing is further from reality and it must change.”
It is not surprising to find a quote like this in Justice Matters. What may surprise you is that the quote is from Dr. Irvin Waller, a highly regarded victim advocate in the United States and abroad. Dr. Waller is a professor of criminology at the University of Ottawa and he is the founding CEO of the International Centre for Prevention of Crime affiliated with the United Nations. Dr. Waller served as President and Secretary General of the World Society of Victimology. His work led to the United Nation’s adoption of the Declaration on Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power.
The above quote comes from Dr. Waller’s book Less Law, More Order: The Truth About Reducing Crime. Less Law, More Order outlines how governments can use their tax-generated income wisely to prevent crime and support crime survivors. The book advocates a justice reinvestment model from a victim advocate’s point of view. In doing so, Dr. Waller also challenges “tough on crime” policies:
“Whatever the talk, our taxes today are being used primarily to respond to crime by being reactive, reactionary, and repressive. We pay for professional law enforcement officers, professional lawyers, professional judges but the gains in terms of reducing victimization are not significant. We are misusing our taxes on expensive, comparatively ineffective, and short-term solutions. We also pay to incarcerate far too many young adults, particularly of racial minorities. We waste taxes on a system that is tough on victims of crime, tough on taxpayers, and tough to use to get crime down.”
Dr. Waller demonstrates that if a government reinvests the equivalent of 10% of what it is currently spending on reacting to crime and instead spends this money on developing and enhancing crime prevention programs and crime survivor support, there would be a 50% reduction in the number of victims by the end of a ten-year period. Dr. Waller advocates that 5% of the reallocation go to crime prevention programs that target key risk factors; 3% go to crime survivor support and enforcement of victims’ rights; and 2% go to training and data systems that would be needed to sustain the shift from a reactive system to an enforcement- and prevention-oriented system.
Dr. Waller’s Approach to Public Safety
Less Law, More Order outlines specific steps that governments and communities can implement to prevent crime and invest in better futures for individuals, families, and communities:
- Invest in youth in the community. This can be done by providing more mentoring programs, job training, and assistance to attend college. More public health nurses should be available to help struggling mothers improve their parenting techniques. Schools should address the root causes of bullying.
- Stop violence against women and children. This can be accomplished by increasing access to child support, family law assistance, and access to programs that assist survivors of domestic and sexual violence. People who have abused their partner should have access to batterer intervention programs. All youth should learn about healthy relationships and conflict resolution.
- Help neighbors watch out for and design ways to reduce crime. People should get to know their neighbors, look out for one another, and collaborate to address social risk factors.
- Tackle risk factors with both prevention and enforcement. Dr. Waller advocates for police to become more problem-oriented and collaborate with schools and other agencies to tackle risk factors, such as illegal handguns, alcohol, and drugs. Outlaw drug wars and invest in substance abuse treatment and mental health services. The death penalty should be abolished.
- Guarantee justice and support for crime victims. Crime victims’ right to be treated with dignity and respect should be protected and enforced. This respect should come from police, the courts, and any other justice professional. Victims should also receive timely information about a case and referrals to services, and should be able to be present and heard at critical stages of justice proceedings. Victims should receive full and timely restitution.
Dr. Waller encapsulates his views in a short commentary entitled “Less Law, More Order: Best Hope for Crime Victims:”
“Permanent solutions, not knee-jerk reactions to specific headline-grabbing crimes, are what crime victims need. Hiring more police officers, as has been the solution in many cities across the world, creates more prisoners – but not more justice and certainly not more peace. Invest in youth, invest in neighborhoods, invest in the future – this is how crime must be fought. Guarantee rights and services for victims of crime – that is justice.”[1]
Prevention and Response: An Appropriate Approach?
Addressing public safety and crime survivors’ needs from a stronger prevention- and response-oriented approach may seem like a radical idea to some people, but it is an approach already used to address other issues that affect individuals, communities, and government spending. Perhaps it’s best to think of it this way: what if Oregon based its public safety system on a public health system model? Take breast cancer as an example. Although it was once a taboo issue, huge strides have been made over the past few decades to educate women about their risk of developing breast cancer. Women understand – and check for – warning signs. Doctors screen patients on a regular basis. If someone develops breast cancer, she can expect to receive support from her loved ones and the community. Her physician will take steps to remove the cancerous cells and prevent the cancer from returning in the future. She can access support groups to help her process her emotional and physical responses to the cancer. She can find free legal assistance if she faces health insurance problems. Her loved ones can access information to help her through this difficult time.
This approach to breast cancer makes sense. We would be outraged if doctors only focused on treating breast cancer and did nothing to prevent it. We would be horrified if women with breast cancer were shunned by their loved ones and the community. We would be shocked if women with breast cancer weren’t able to access supportive services. We would storm the Capitol steps if Oregon didn’t fund medical care and prevention efforts.
We expect a holistic approach from our government and our communities to prevent and respond to breast cancer. As well we should: the Pacific Northwest has the highest rates of breast cancer in the nation.[2]
Yet Oregon faces an even more prevalent threat to women’s health: domestic violence in Oregon occurs 10 times more frequently than breast cancer.[3] Why do we accept so much less for these women?
* Author’s note: I feel it’s worth mentioning that John Stein and Marlene Young, two pioneers of the victim assistance field in the United States and abroad, recommended Less Law, More Order to me while we were all tabling a Crime Victims’ Rights Week event at the Oregon Capitol. John and Marlene embody the spirit of the victim assistance and victims’ rights fields. It is because of their hard work over the last few decades that so many crime survivors have access to services and dignity and respect in the justice system.
[1] Irvin Waller. “Less Law, More Order: Best Hope for Crime Victims.” http://www.iovahelp.org/About/IrvinWaller/WallerOnJusticeForVictims.pdf
[2]The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation: Oregon and SW Washington Affiliate
[3] “Background Brief on Domestic Violence,” prepared by Bill Taylor of the Legislative Committee Services.
This article originally appeared in the Summer 2009 issue of Justice Matters.
