Organised Crime & Crime Prevention - what works? - Scandinavian ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

NSfK´s 40. forskerseminar, Espoo, Finland 1998 One aspect of life control and the future in the prisoners' eyes What we think about our - or any other quarters' - possibility to influence our own future can be seen as a part of our life control, a part of manageability in life (e.g. Järvikoski 1996, 45; Pietilä 1994, 21). Therefore the prisoners were asked how much they think that certain quarters, including themselves, have an influence on their future. Almost all of them - 98% - answered that oneself at least has a little influence on one's life, and 86% of Table 2. The quarters having influence on the prisoners´ own future (%) Quarters having influence on the prisoners´ own future: 166 Not at all A little Great Sum N Prisoner himself 2 12 86 100 259 Friends and companions (in civilian life) Family Coincidence Social situation in Finland World situation Authorities (in civilian life) God Relatives Beforehand ordained fate Fellow prisoners Prison personnel Neighbours (in civilian life) 19 25 25 29 35 38 51 53 51 63 68 69 prisoners said that one has great influence on one's own future. Friends and family come next on this list. The influence of coincidence was also relatively highly ranked among the prisoners, and according to them, has more impact on their future than, for example, some authorities in civilian life. It is interesting to see that neighbours, persons that live next to you in civilian life; and prison personnel, persons that you cannot avoid meeting in prison, were not ranked highly. Some steps on the way to conclusions According to the preliminary findings of the research, security as a concept is closely linked to basic or central human needs. A secure life seemed to be consist of many social aspects, like human relationships, work and love. However, sufficient livelihood, residence and health also play a central role. Insecurity as a concept seems to imply problems with the satisfaction of human needs or some kind of uncertainty of the continuation of well-being. This result is also supported by the earlier studies among civilian people (e.g. Väisänen 1995, Niemelä 1997). The prisoners' ideas of a secure life were in general more similar, i. e. with the same contents, as compared with their thoughts of insecurity. The aspects of insecurity varied a lot, and perhaps they more often stemmed from the basis of the participant's personal life experiences. Security is more like an ideal situation, an idea of a good life - insecurity reflects something about the reality people are living with and the problems they meet while trying to 56 35 54 42 44 44 27 37 30 34 23 27 25 40 21 29 21 18 22 10 19 3 9 4 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 258 255 258 258 258 255 255 258 257 259 256 258
NSfK´s 40. forskerseminar, Espoo, Finland 1998 manage. Information on both of these is needed if our aim is to act constructively: ideals give us the aims to struggle for and reality shows us the obstacles we should to be able to remove. The central values linked to security, like family security and own security, are highly valued among prisoners and civilians. The prisoners seem to think that the things which are nearer them or their family, like freedom, health, family security and love, are more important than those linked with phenomena far removed from their daily life, such as world peace, national security - or even work - may be. Perhaps the differences here are also linked with the differences in their life conditions: certain values are more important to people partly because they might have more to lose if those particular things are or should be threatened. Traditionally work forms the most significant part of the daily activities in Finnish prisons. What is the effect on these activities if prisoners generally do not greatly appreciate work - i.e. the traditional forms of work that are available for them in real life in and outside prison? What does this mean from the point of view of managing in civilian life? However 39% of the prisoners said that work is included in a secure life. And there were many other more highly valued things among them. Perhaps we should think about, how to link the things they appreciate more with the constructive elements of activities like work; e.g. earning a living (even partly), having something meaningful to do and finding one's place in society without committing crimes. What could be the new legal and more constructive ways of selfrealization during the sentence, the ways that could continue of be useful after release? It can easily be seen within the answers of the prisoners that their autonomy has been threatened and limited during their life: for example decreasing freedom and bureaucracy are among the ten most common causes of insecurity. The threat of marginalization causes them insecurity in the form of peoples' disregard for one and another, reduction of social and health services, amount of living expences and cutting unemployment benefits. In comparison with the samples of civilian men it becomes prominent that in general prisoners feel much insecurity and to a greater degree in Finnish society. Instead of locking many doors of survival we should be able to open some more. Our right to take their freedom should increase our reponsibilty and duties to try to help them to keep their freedom after release. For the most part it is an extremely good thing to trust oneself in getting out of troubles. But trusting mostly only in oneself is not such a good thing. If one succeeds, there is only oneself to thank for it, but if one does not succeed, who is to blaim? Many of the prisoners underline that "everyone is the master of their own fortune". As a social worker in a Finnish prison I have met many "lonely riders" who have lost their lands, horses and whatever still remains of their self-respect in this way. Among the prisoners' it seems to be quite general to trust friends, companions and family too - the "unofficial" people near them - and less general to believe in professionals, authorities and prison personnel. But what if there are not so many friends or family members available or they already have quite a lot of problems of their own? It is a great challenge for both prisoners and people trying to help them to build a confidential and functional relationship. But who do you trust and what do you do if you really mostly believe that coincidence has such a great influence on your future anyway? It is obvious that the Cognitive Skills Training Program, other programs or any other means are needed to support peoples' control over their personal life - perhaps also in prison rather than just outside it. But it is worth remembering that everything in life is not just in our own hands. Life control is never only a question of individuals. There are always some meaningful others; community, society and so on, even coincidences, to be somehow taken into account. 167
Page 1 and 2:
Organised Crime & Crime Prevention
Page 3 and 4:
Rådsmedlemmer: Flemming Balvig, Da
Page 5:
ISBN 87-987103-0-3
Page 8 and 9:
NSfK’s 40. forskerseminar, Espoo,
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123: NSfK’s 40. forskerseminar, Espoo,
Page 166 and 167: NSfK´s 40. forskerseminar, Espoo,
Page 222 and 223:
NSfK´s 40. forskerseminar, Espoo,
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272:
show all

Organised Crime & Crime Prevention - what works? - Scandinavian ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?