HEALTH PLUS:Shoppers are forced to pay more for their goods because others do not pay at all, writes MARIE MURRAY
SHOPLIFTING increases as Christmas approaches. It increases in times of economic recession. It is highly linked to depression. It is linked to forms of bereavement, to relationship breakdown and to the experience of loss. Of course, it is also an organised crime often conducted to fund substance addiction.
Surveys show great diversity in perceptions of shoplifting. Some see it as justifiable pilfering of overpriced goods from nameless corporate bodies. They rationalise it as a non-violent victimless crime that does not hurt anyone but redresses the imbalance between profit margins and the actual value of goods. Surprisingly, people who would never condone theft from anyone they know, believe that they have a right to take from anonymous agencies.
One classic view of shoplifting is that it is predominantly an adolescent risk-taking behaviour which feeds the psychological need for excitement and the practical need for goods that are out of reach of the adolescent purse. It is not useful to regard shoplifting as normative adolescent behaviour – it is not.
Many regard shoplifting as the redress of the needy, an understandable activity when access is denied to goods that other people have. They see poverty as a prime motivation underlying shoplifting and express a level of sympathy for those who are forced to get what they need in this way. This is because they are aware that many women who steal do so for their children, for clothes, for treats, for Christmas presents or when they are in financial crises.
Non-shoplifters are also sympathetic to those whose shoplifting is due to mental ill-health. The think of it as an activity of respectable lonely, confused, isolated, alienated older ladies: Alan Bennett-type characters suffering from sadness and emotional neglect. And the idea of kleptomania, of impulsive, obsessive-compulsive pilfering, is intriguing for those who cannot imagine how anyone could actually steal and not die of panic before they had left the shop.
Shoplifting has also been associated with the rich and famous when boredom sets in, a condition that arises when anything that is desired can be purchased, and so the next level thrill is to pilfer and feel the power of not being caught.
But there are many who are incensed at having to pay for the dishonesty of others which hikes up the cost of goods due to security systems, personnel and insurance. They pay more because others do not pay at all.
Shoplifters provide reasons and rationalisations when they are asked why they steal. Many young shoplifters believe that they are too swift to be caught, that even if they are caught they will not be prosecuted and that even if prosecuted they will not be punished – which in the case of young offenders is also often true.
Adolescent shoplifting may be done as a dare, as a rite of passage, as an act of rebellion, to get things the adolescent wants or needs, to challenge authority, to outwit adults, to express distress, to elicit parental attention, or to assert competence in the face of fear.
As in all areas of behavioural development, young people learn from what they see adults do and how parents converse with them about issues of honesty. Those most at risk are young people who spend too much time in groups in shopping malls, those who are angry, disappointed, rejected, upset or depressed and those who are most easily influenced by the group.
Additionally, if a young person does not have possessions consistent with peers, this can be a motivation to steal. Stealing may also arise because of bullying, to secure goods for the bully or because of the intimidation of the gang. Shoplifting may be an attempt to keep up with peers, to be part of the crowd. It may be an expression of anger and emotional pain.
If a young person is found with possessions that could not possibly have been bought, this requires attention. Accusation before exploration is not helpful. When an adolescent steals, the first response should not be anger but serious insistent exploration of why he or she decided to steal. What was the motivation? Was this an isolated incident or part of an ongoing pattern? Does the young person understand why parents would be concerned? Do parents understand why the young person stole?
Decisions also have to be made, depending on the circumstances, about the meaning of the stealing, what professional interventions, if any, are required and how return of the goods, financial repayment or charitable donation to the equivalent value of the stolen goods will be made.
Clinical psychologist Marie Murray is director of the UCD Student Counselling Services. Her most recent book, Living Our Times, is published by Gill and Macmillan