Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess the usefulness of functionalist approaches in explaining crime (21 marks)

Deviance is defined as the state of diverging from usual or accepted standards whereas crime is defined as an action or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law. Usually, we would expect that functionalists would regard crime and deviance as wholly negative. However, functionalists such as Durkheim see the “beneficial effects of crime for society” whether there are “limited” or not. Additionally, functionalists see crime as inevitable and universal. Every known society has some level of crime and deviance. Within this essay, I will be exploring the ways key functionalists such as Durkheim, Merton, Cohen, Cloward and Ohlin view crime and criticisms towards their ideas.
Durkheim states “crime is normal… an integral part of all healthy societies.” There are two reasons why crime and deviance are found in all societies. Which are; not everyone is equally effectively socialised into the shared norms and values and, therefore, some individuals will be prone to deviate. Secondly, in complex modern societies there is a diversity of lifestyles and values. Different groups develop their own subcultures with their own norms and values. The mainstream culture may regard their norms as deviant.
Durkheim’s perspectives highlights that crime is not just inevitable but it also fulfils two important functions. Firstly, boundary maintenance. Crime produces a reaction from society, uniting its members in condemnation of the wrongdoer and reinforcing the shared norms and values. Secondly, adaption and change. All change starts with an act of deviance. Individuals with new ideas, values and ways of living must not be completely stifled by the weight of society control. In the long run their values may give rise to a new culture and morality.