Haynie, Dana L.: Contexts of Risk

Sarah Browning

For much of the modern era of criminology, biological explanations of crime had been associated with pseudoscientific “research” epitomized by Cesare Lombroso and William Sheldon. Both Lombroso and Sheldon believed that biological characteristics of humans could differentiate “born criminals” from law-abiding citizens. As this deterministic understanding of human behavior was rejected, so too were biological theories of criminology. However, as scientists gained a deeper understanding of the interaction between genes and environment in the latter part of the 20th century, biosocial theories of criminology enjoyed a modern-day resurgence. Combine this resurgence with the increasing attention given to explanations of female offending as a result of feminist perspectives, and Dana L. Haynie's 2003 “Contexts of Risk” appears particularly timely. Haynie's work appeared at a time when criminologists were increasingly open to the idea that social environments may determine whether biological predispositions toward criminality result in actual criminal behavior. In essence, the ...

Users without subscription are not able to see the full content on this title. Please, subscribe or login to access all content on this website.