Therapeutic reduction is one of the commonly used tools to analyze the nature or origin of criminal activities. For instance, the concept has been used by theorists to explain how poverty is a leading cause of crime in society. Proponents of this tool argue that individuals who live below the poverty line might be motivated to engage in felonies. The main driving force is to acquire resources or wealth and eventually lead better lives (Bystrova & Gottschalk, 2015). The framework goes further to explain why a person’s hereditary orientation can encourage him or her to abuse different drugs.
From a personal perspective, I strongly believe that the argument that therapeutic reduction is nothing more than an excuse for abdicating responsibility for one’s actions is a fallacy. This is the case because history has proved that people’s living conditions and experiences will dictate how they lead their lifestyles. For instance, sociological arguments and conflict theories have explained how people engage in criminal activities (Bystrova & Gottschalk, 2015). A good example is how the increasing levels of poverty in a given community can stimulate more people to engage in crime.
The tool has been widely used to explain why specific people become addicted to drugs. It might be argued that some people become alcoholics because of their irresponsible behaviors. However, scientists have indicated clearly that the behavior is correlated to genetic composition. Tuvblad and Beaver (2013) go further to indicate that a therapeutic reduction is an evidence-based tool that can be used to explain why several people engage in drug abuse in society.
The contentious issue emerging from the use of therapeutic reduction in the application of double standards in society today. This is the case because society should be aware of the unique situations and risk factors associated with a given condition or malpractice (Tuvblad & Beaver, 2013). This understanding will ensure a given legal practitioner or social worker is capable of describing the unique behavior exhibited by an individual.
Does a Person’s Surrounding Dictate His or Her Actions?
Statistics recorded in the United States show conclusively that many people living in poverty will engage in different malpractices such as crime. Bystrova and Gottschalk (2015) go further to argue that individuals who lived in abuse households will have increased chances of becoming violent. The concept of peer pressure has been supported by criminologists and theorists because it motivates individuals to copy specific behaviors and practices. Psychologists have also indicated that the environment is one of the factors dictating a person’s behaviors and actions.
When these ideas are combined with the therapeutic reduction model, more experts will be able to understand why some people engage in different malpractices such as drug abuse or crime. This knowledge will guide criminologists and human services professionals to come up with better interventions that can address the root causes of the social evils in the society today. However, it would be wrong to apply double standards in society whenever dealing with substance abuse, drug trafficking, and crime in society (Tuvblad & Beaver, 2013). That being the case, the surrounding environment and therapeutic reduction are two unique concepts that can be embraced to understand and address most of the social problems affecting many communities today. The decision to use therapeutic reduction as an excuse for abdicating responsibility for an individual’s actions will result in more problems rather than delivering sustainable solutions.
References
Bystrova, E., & Gottschalk, P. (2015). Social conflict theory and white-collar criminals: Why does the ruling class punish their own? Pakistan Journal of Criminology, 7(1), 1-15. Web.
Tuvblad, C., & Beaver, K. (2013). Genetic and environmental influences on antisocial behavior. Journal of Criminal Justice, 41(5), 273-276. Web.