Introduction
The purpose of the system of criminal justice is not only to prevent crime from happening but also guaranteeing protection for the victims of the crime. From the perspective of a victim, the act of crime does not always appear to be something that can be rationally grasped. However, the social ecology of crime and its effect on the victims can be analyzed from the standpoint of the different theories of victimization in order to anticipate and limit the possible negative outcomes for the victims of crime. This paper’s objective is to explore different theories of victimization in order to analyze the issues with the existing framework of protecting victims of the crime and to review the possible ways of coping with victimization.
Theories of victimization
There are a few factors affecting the victimization risks. According to Siegel (2007), males are more likely to experience as a victim such crimes as assault, robbery and violent sorts of crimes, whereas women are more victimized in such crimes as rape and sexual assault; nevertheless, “the gender rates in victimization appear to be narrowing” (p.72). Other risk factors include age and lifestyle. However, different theories of victimization go one step further and interpret the whole social background behind the victimization, which helps in deterring those factors.
The victim precipitation theory considers that in some cases, the behavior of the victim is the factor that initiates confrontation (Siegel, 2007). Although, it is hard to apply this theory to such crimes as, for example, robbery. However, the lifestyle theory is, perhaps, more specific for such case. According to it, sometimes the lifestyle of the person who is victimized increases his or her exposure to the offenders (Siegel, 2007). Deviant place theory claims that even though the victim does not initiate the confrontation, the residence in areas with high crime rates increases the risk of being victimized. A more complex theory that is a combination of the previous ones is the routine activities theory, according to which, the act of crime requires “availability of suitable targets, absence of capable guardians, and present of motivated offenders” (Siegel, 2007, p. 78). From the latter theory, we can conclude that, at least, there are means to prevent the crime, if one of the components of the crime is lacking.
Coping with victimization
The main component of the psychological state of victimization is questioning the assumptions and patterns of a victim’s own behavior. Under the state of disequilibrium and absence of control, it evokes anxiety. The victims of crime cannot immediately see the actual state of affairs after negative things that happened to them, so the process of misleading rationalization can result in the distorted image of what happened and, why it happened.
According to Janoff-Bulman and Frieze (1983), process of coping with being victimized has to reestablish “a conceptual system that will allow the victim to once again function effectively; the parts of the conceptual system that have been shaken will have to be rebuilt”(p. 7). In other words, victims cannot be disturbed or unnecessarily stressed because being in the state of anxiety, they cannot rationally estimate the risks and respond adequately to stressful situation. So, they cannot be aggressively or insistently interrogated. Also, it is important not to make victims of crime doubt their actions because their positive self-image is vulnerable and takes time to be repaired.
Conclusion
The state of being victimized has a number of consequences to the psychological state. In order to help victims of crime, they should not be undergoing any unnecessary stress or the procedures that can undermine their positive self-image and integrated state of mind.
References
Janoff-Bulman, R., & Frieze, I. H. (1983). A theoretical perspective for understanding reactions to victimization. Journal of social issues 39(2), 1-17.
Siegel, L. (2007). Criminology: Theories, Patterns, and Typologies. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.