Vulnerability Theory

123456789101112
Across
  1. 4. Together with [EMBODIED], Fineman’s concept of all humans being situated within society’s intricate web challenges the traditional model of the autonomous and independent ‘Liberal Legal Subject (LLS)’ (2008).
  2. 5. Fundamental British Value that means nobody is above the law (Bowling and Marks, 2017). A VT approach may argue that S&S as arbitrary use of state power undermines this answer.
  3. 8. Fineman (2017) the ability to recover from physical, social, or economic harms. This is not something humans are born with (2015, p.2090) but instead accumulate through the distribution of resources by societal institutions and the state (2017).
  4. 10. To what degree is resilience fostered? VT’s primary focus is on societal institutions’ role in providing resilience. (Fineman, 2008). Delsol (2015) argues that those who consider S&S effective at doing this fail to adequately consider its drawbacks, including damaged trust between the public and the police. To analyse the extent of its effectiveness, according to Lacey (1988), both aspects ought to be considered, with appropriate factoring in of the costs.
  5. 11. Statutory police powers stating that a constable may search any person or vehicle if he has reaosnable grounds for suspecting he will find stolen or prohibited articles (Police and Crime Evidence Act (PACE) 1984). If an officer above inspector reasonably anticipates prescribed offences may be committed within a specific area, a constable may S+S whether or not they have reasonable grounds for suspicion (Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act (PCSCA) 2022).
Down
  1. 1. Together with [EMBEDDEDNESS], the idea of humans as ‘fleshy, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ creatures,’ constantly at risk of physical harm also challenges the LLS model.
  2. 2. The type of state a vulnerability approach argues in favour of: one that takes responsibility for citizens’ access to resilience-providing institutions, such as policing.
  3. 3. Together with [EMBODIED], Fineman’s concept of all humans being situated within society’s intricate web challenges the traditional model of the autonomous and independent ‘Liberal Legal Subject (LLS)’ (2008).
  4. 6. ‘Universal, constant, and inherent in the human condition’ (Fineman, 2008). VT argues that no one person or group is ‘more vulnerable’ than another- as embodied humans we are all equally susceptible to the possibility of harm. Rather, it is the resources we have access to that influence our varying experiences with vulnerability (2008); nothing inherent about any one person makes them ‘more vulnerable’ to facing S&S, rather the uneven distribution of resources by the police exposes this among some communities more than others.
  5. 7. The type of state a vulnerability approach argues in favour of: one that takes responsibility for citizens’ access to resilience-providing institutions, such as policing.
  6. 9. Does S&S work how its supposed to? The Metropolitan Police Service (2014) say that S&S is crucial in preventing violence and the carrying of weapons. However, many authors such as Ream et al (2010), Miller (2000), and Reiner (2015) refute this, arguing that there is minimal evidence to support the claim that S&S even deters criminals.
  7. 12. Fundamental British Value that means nobody is above the law (Bowling and Marks, 2017). A VT approach may argue that S&S as arbitrary use of state power undermines this answer.