Introduction

Duggan, Marian

doi:10.1332/policypress/9781447338765.003.0001

Cited by 6 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, it is worth briefly mentioning here that the reversal of the 'offenderisation' of children through CCE faces barriers as a result of the difficulties that young people experience in conforming to the narrow and restrictive expectations of the 'victim' role itself. Victimhood, as it is normatively conceptualised, is a particularly 'cramped identity' (Minow, 1993(Minow, : 1432 reducing and restricting its inhabitants to a narrow set of traits-most frequently vulnerability, passivity, blamelessness and 'respectability' (Christie, 1986;Duggan, 2018)-and experiences: typically those of total suffering and pain (Van Dijk, 2009). Normative ideas of what it means to be a victim of exploitation understandably often fail to capture the complex and multifaceted lived realities of young people affected by CCE (Marshall, 2022).…”

Section: 'Victim' As An Insufficient Labelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Victims first? Examining the place of ‘child criminal exploitation’ within ‘child first’ youth justice

Marshall

2023

Children & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Child first' principles have become increasingly prevalent within youth justice policy in England and Wales.In parallel, the concept of 'child criminal exploitation' (CCE) has also emerged. On the surface, CCE compliments 'child first' principles by reconceptualising 'young offenders', who would previously have been criminalised, as children who are victims of exploitation.However, this article identifies two areas of conflict: rather than being diversionary, current responses to CCE further entrench children in the justice system; and, rather than responding holistically to unmet need among all children involved in offending, the concept of CCE functions to exclude some children from support.

show abstract

Section: 'Victim' As An Insufficient Labelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Victims first? Examining the place of ‘child criminal exploitation’ within ‘child first’ youth justice

Marshall

2023

Children & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Defined by Christie (1986: 18) as ‘a person or category of individuals who – when hit by crime – most readily is given the complete and legitimate status of being a ‘victim”, the ‘ideal victim’ concept has pervaded Western criminological scholarship and criminal justice policy (Duggan, 2018: 1). It is intrinsically linked to gendered, ageist and racialised notions of innocence, passivity and blamelessness (McGarry and Walklate, 2015).…”

Section: Ideal Victims and Ideal Offendersmentioning

confidence: 99%

When ideal victims don’t make ideal offenders: The (re)framing of legacy case prosecutions against elderly perpetrators of state violence

Hearty

2023

Crime, Media, Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article undertakes a victimological critique of media coverage, social media commentary and parliamentary debate on the prosecution of former British soldier Dennis Hutchings for the death of an unarmed and vulnerable adult in Northern Ireland in 1974. It argues that a careful reframing of events and actors by the media, politicians and veterans’ movement has obfuscated perceptions of victimhood by creating a climate that favours the perpetrator rather than the victim. While this victimological reframing may reflect the natural sympathy felt towards aged and ailing defendants, it also speaks to the ability to manipulate coverage of the case so that it serves current interests: on the one hand it fits with the UK Government’s socio-political interests in how historic state violence in the North of Ireland should be ‘dealt with’, while on the other hand it also reflects longstanding cultural sensitivities that the British ‘imagined community’ has about its military veterans. This has seen Hutchings being framed less as an ‘ideal offender’ who targeted an unarmed and vulnerable person and more as an elderly victim of a politicised ‘witch hunt’ against military veterans.

show abstract

“…For example, it is crucial to understand the occurrence of secondary victimisation caused by the behaviour or attitudes towards a victim by the institutions with delegated responsibility for ASB that amounts to victim-blaming (Duggan, 2018). As street-level bureaucrats working within a neoliberal environment use their discretion when demand for services outweighs the supply, performance is orientated towards goal achievement, which is impossible to measure, ambiguous, or conflicting (Lipsky, 1983).…”

Section: Critical Victimology and Asbmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These mechanisms produced intended and unintended consequences which perpetuated secondary victimisation (Mawby and Walklate, 1994). Secondary victimisation refers to the behaviours and attitudes held by authorities towards a victim; this conduct amplifies the pre-existing harm caused through poor treatment and the use of inappropriate interventions (Duggan, 2018). We can understand generative mechanisms as the underlying social processes in relation to structures, powers, and relations (Bhaskar, 2008;Outhwaite, 1983).…”

Section: Impact Of Generative Mechanisms and Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, the neoliberal approach has resulted in practitioner cultures dictating accountability and governance for addressing ASB, including who meets the 'ideal victim' criteria (e.g. actual, designated, rejected, and non-victim) (Duggan, 2018). This outcome is due to devolved decision-making and responsibilisation to a broader range of authorised persons.…”

Section: Impact Of Generative Mechanisms and Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Examining victims’ experiences of Community Protection Notices in managing anti-social behaviour

Rodgers

2022

International Review of Victimology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Community Protection Notice (CPN) is a civil order designed to protect communities from anti-social behaviour (ASB) within England and Wales by addressing unreasonable and persistent conduct, which has ‘a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality’. Introduced under the ‘Putting Victims First’ agenda and the ASB, Crime and Policing Act (2014), the civil order can impose prohibitions alongside positive requirements upon any person aged 16 or over, business, or organisation. Before a CPN is issued, a Community Protection Warning (CPW) must be put in place by the police, local authority, social housing provider, or any other authorised persons with delegated power from the local authority. This paper reports the findings of a qualitative study that used semi-structured interviews to explore ASB victims’ experiences of CPWs/CPNs for the first time. Discussions focus upon the impact of the ASB, authorities’ responses, perceived effectiveness of CPWs/CPNs, and recommendations for change. Significant concerns emerge from the victims’ constructions of the CPN process regarding transparency, accountability, the correctability of requirements imposed, and victim involvement. The findings signify the need for an authentically restorative approach to ASB with three empirically grounded recommendations provided that account for ASB victims’ needs and vulnerabilities.

show abstract

Introduction

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Victims first? Examining the place of ‘child criminal exploitation’ within ‘child first’ youth justice

Victims first? Examining the place of ‘child criminal exploitation’ within ‘child first’ youth justice

When ideal victims don’t make ideal offenders: The (re)framing of legacy case prosecutions against elderly perpetrators of state violence

Examining victims’ experiences of Community Protection Notices in managing anti-social behaviour

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About