The economy of crime

Published 12:18 am Sunday, October 19, 2008

Is it just me or has anyone else noticed what seems to be a rise in criminal activity across the country? I don’t know the exact numbers so maybe I’m just looking for it, but it seems that over the past few months I’ve noticed more and more crimes, especially ones related to monetary gain. I’m not the only one either. Numerous studies have been done examining the effects of a bad economy on criminal behavior.

At first glance I want to judge the actions of these people. Why do they have to make tough times even tougher? What gives them the right to violate other people? We’re all experiencing the stress, yet we’re not all breaking the law. And then I remember one of the truths I’ve learned and observed: given the right conditions and just the right circumstances, we are all capable of various levels of wrongdoing.

When the economy goes bad and desperation and frustrations mount, you typically see an increase in criminal activity but in two very different types of people.

On one end of the spectrum, you have those who already have a low level of morality, and already walk a fine line with disregard for the law and the rights of others, but can usually keep themselves under the radar. However, in troubled economic times, you take those who are already on shaky ground, troubled, stressed, strained, having difficulty getting ahead, a fair shake, already feel wronged and you couple that with little respect or concern for others, and you end up with a segment of the population who are no longer walking that fine line but who are crossing it. Whatever small detail prevented their unlawful behavior previously is now disregarded and that slight change in stress and strain, whether it be financial, familial, or what have you, and they now see criminal actions as having more benefit than cost.

Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development helps us understand these individuals who are in what is referred to as the pre-conventional level of moral development. That means their behavior is guided strictly by fear of getting caught and facing consequences. And this only works when those consequences are viewed as being too harsh to justify the behavior. But when their perceived benefits outweigh their perceived costs, they’ll choose the wrong behavior anyway.

As the economy struggles, honest work becomes harder to find, groceries and gasoline prices skyrocket, and frustrations mount, these individuals begin viewing crime for monetary gain as more beneficial than the potential consequence of getting caught. They stop caring about how their behavior affects others and started caring about their own need to tip the scales back in their favor. Throw in reduced funding for law enforcement, decreased police presence, and changes in response and detainment policies, and the potential consequence of being held accountable just lessened even more.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, you have those who have a high level of morality and who always try to do what’s right. They abide by the law because they believe in doing what’s right for the sake of being virtuous. As long as their basic needs and the needs of those they love and care for are met, they would never dream of wrongdoing. However, even these individuals are capable of unlawful acts if they become desperate enough.

Kohlberg’s Theory states these individuals are in the final stages of moral development known as the post-conventional level. What this tells us is that even in this most advanced stage of moral decision making, doing what seems right for others is considered more important than the law. What comes to mind is the story of Robin Hood, who stole from the rich to feed the poor. The example used by every professor who taught me this model was of the man whose dying wife needed prescription drugs that he could not afford to purchase so he stole them for her benefit.

Because of the changing conditions around us in recent months, we are seeing more and more individuals in both categories, and therefore a possible increase in criminal behavior. Those that were just barely behaving anyway are now seeing less reason to do so and more reason not to. Others are in dire straights and make the decision to commit a crime to benefit those they care for, something they would have never considered before desperation.

Regardless of the reason, it’s never OK. Whether it’s stealing food to feed your family, siphoning gasoline to get to work, embezzling money to pay your house note, or holding a gun to a cashier’s head and demanding money, it’s never OK. Just because we try to understand a behavior doesn’t mean we excuse it. But I do like to ask myself what my threshold would be, because remember, given the right conditions and just the right circumstances, we are all capable of various levels of wrongdoing.



Dr. Susan Eaves is a behavioral specialist and therapist in the Division of Children and Youth Services at Weems Community Mental Health. E-mail her at seaves@weemsmh.com.