Contemporary Cultural Diversity Issues Presentation Essay

Introduction

The criminal justice system has transformed over the last few decades and today very few cases of discrimination are reported. However, it is also incorrect to say that in the current system we do not grapple with unfair treatment while administering justice. In the 20^th century, the racial divide especially in the United States was highly signified by crime and punishment.

Although the divide has been reducing in the 21^st century, unfair treatment in the criminal justice system is still influenced by gender and ethnic backgrounds. As it was routine in the past 50 years, members of the minority ethnic groups were denied bail, charged indiscriminately or punished inappropriately (McNamara & Burns, 2009). This research seeks to explain the racial and ethnic disparities in the criminal justice system as well as identifying the system’s response to public perception of bias.

Brief definition

The criminal justice system is made up of government institutions with the mandate of maintaining social control, obstructing and averting criminal activities, punishing law breakers and effecting rehabilitation (McNamara & Burns, 2009). Gender and ethnic discrimination in criminal justice is any form of unfair execution of the above mentioned mandates to the public.

The system is made-up of three major departments which are the legislative, the adjudication, and the correction department (McNamara & Burns, 2009). The legislative department deals with the creation of laws to govern the system. On the other hand, the adjudication refers to the law courts where cases are handled. Lastly, the correction department includes the jails, prisons, probation department and the parole (The Criminology and Criminal Justice Collective of Northern Arizona University, 2009).

System’s gender and ethnic bias

In the current globalised world, we might have won against discrimination in the justice system. Nonetheless, there are still some aspects that have proved the existence of bias in the system. There are some ethnic minority groups that are unduly represented in difficult criminal justice cases (McNamara & Burns, 2009).

This is true in both the international and local platforms. Ethnic and gender bias in criminal systems is explicitly shown through the seriousness given to these cases and the strength accorded to the evidence. Across the different discretion points, ethnic and gender disparities play a major role in determining the outcomes in the criminal justice system.

Differences in cultural and ethnic beliefs are factors that must be considered in order to have a fair justice system. Minority groups suffer unfair treatment in terms of offence-seriousness, offending history and socioeconomic status.

For instance, in the American criminal justice system, the chivalry thesis applies. This theory suggests that women are treated more leniently compared to their male counterparts in the American system (McNamara & Burns, 2009). Nonetheless, women also have their own thoughts regarding the criminal justice system.

According to the deviance theory, women feel that the system is too harsh on them since it is a male dominated institution. It has been argued that women get harsh sentences because they are perceived to be double deviant. The first deviance is breaking the law and contravening the acceptable social norms and the second is deviating from the acceptable gender norms (McNamara & Burns, 2009). Gender norms dictate how a woman should behave based on social and ethical beliefs.

Criminal activities are normally associated with men hence the double deviant perception when a woman is involved. This theory suggests that a woman is severely punished and discriminated against for breaking the written law and the acceptable social and ethical norms.

System’s response to gender and ethnic bias

In the criminal justice system, bias is an aspect that has not been directly addressed. In America for example, the system has not addressed the issue directly rather it has dealt with contributors of bias. The system’s response has targeted the reduction of offences and re-offenders, addressing process related factors that result to direct discrimination, and the role of neutral legislation (The Criminology and Criminal Justice Collective of Northern Arizona University, 2009).

In addition, it has also espoused a holistic approach to deal with the structural disproportion in a more detailed angle. The criminal justice system has also worked towards incorporating several cultural components while giving both the minority and indigenous ethnic groups an equal opportunity in developing the program. Implementation and governance of the system has also been opened to the public to create an inclusive system.

Conclusion

This research has outlined and given factual information concerning the spread of bias in the criminal justice system. Throughout the introduction, the paper suggests that the current generation may be experiencing an improved criminal justice system. The paper clearly states that the 20^th century had the most horrible criminal justice discriminations compared to the 21^st century.

To understand the criminal justice system, the paper gives a brief definition and the structure of the system. Identifying criminal justice discrimination, this essay suggests a review of the seriousness accorded to cases of offenders from different gender and ethnicity. A number of factors that lead to criminal justice discrimination have also been discussed in this essay. The paper concludes by identifying some of the responses made by the criminal justice system to gender and ethnic discrimination.

References

McNamara, R., & Burns, R. (2009). Multiculturalism in the criminal justice system. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

The Criminology and Criminal Justice Collective of Northern Arizona University. (2009). Investigating difference: Human and cultural relations in criminal justice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.