346 the contradiction between what was considered to empirical science’s study of facts and the penal law dogmatism’s abstract beliefs and also between a rational treatment and a consistent penal system. Even then demands were advanced for the abolition of retribution for juvenile offenders and for the rendering harmless of violators who were considered to be incorrigible. During the second half of the 19th century the debate among the proponents of systematic criminology indicated that there were separate theoretical bases concerning the causes of crime, for example genetic contra social environment considerations, which lead to different consequences concerning the choice of measures to prevent crime, for example selective racial purification contra purposeful reformatory methods. The results we have achieved up to nowonly partially support the theses that the 1902 Reformatory Acts concerning upbringing and reformation followed the “sociological school’s programme” and lay under the influence of the advances within modern natural science disciplines. Part IV widens the field of vision to fora of discussion older than IKV and more areas of law than the penal law. The scholastic theory of the state, which can be traced back to the writings of Aristotle and which dominated Western European thought up to at least the 18th century, emphasised that the family, or the household, was the most important unit for the creation of social order and for the benefit of the general commonwealth. The private master of the house was entrusted a great responsibility to carry out the purposeful and crime-preventive upbringing required for the welfare of the state. Young persons who had not been given satisfactory social-ethical upbringing, were, froma penal law ideological point of view, to be treated with more tolerance, as legally incompetent minors, growing mdividuals that should not be blamed and punished in the same manner as adults. In Sweden, starting in the Vasa dynasty, at the latest, the idea of a local social network developed, where the State Church clergy and the parish trustees should support and control the measures for upbringing and supervision carried out by the individual families. Every parish was intended to function as a filter of social and criminal policy, which would collect those cases where the private master could not meet the responsibility that the welfare of the State was considered to require. In a far-reaching perspective stretching from the early 17th to the late 18th century the law makers made continually ever more stringent the demands in legal rules concerning public order and safety, national registration, poor relief, labour legislation and general public education. Increased importance was attached to the private household concurrent with the growth of a tendency towards public control. Public education was placed partly outside the family and the obligation to participate in the education was accompanied by compulsory sanctions directed at neglectful parents.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=