# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Harm & Evidence Research Collaborative (HERC)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Steve Tombs, Professor of Criminology, The Open University

Exactly six months ago, a fire broke out in Grenfell Tower, a 24-storey tower block on the Lancaster West estate in North Kensington, west London. Grenfell was and is many things: a tragedy, an outrage, a testimony to the violence of austerity, the biggest fire in Britain for generations, and perhaps a crime of corporate manslaughter. But it is also the site of a whole series of harms, generated both by the fire and its aftermath - albeit some are much more immediately apparent than others.
Physical Harms
The most manifest harms associated with the fire are, of course, the immediate deaths which it caused - some 71, so it is officially claimed, although intense controversy about the actual numbers has raged. Moreover, a week after the fire, the clinical director of the major trauma centre at King's College Hospital, said that : " Many of the people who have survived will go on to make a good recovery, but how many will have life-changing injuries remains to be seen. It may take weeks and months for some patients to recover physically."

There are other possible physical health effects of the fire which are perhaps less identifiable. It is not fully known what airborne toxins might have been emitted as a result of the fire, and what long-term effects exposures to these might be felt by residents and those in the living in the vicinity. However, we do know that asbestos was present in the building, while hydrogen cyanide was emitted from the burning insulation.

In addition to causing death, injury and illness, various aspects of the aftermath of the fire are likely to have caused detrimental health effects. First, it is likely that anyone with existing problems of alcohol and/or drug dependency at the time of the fire would have experienced heightened dependency as a result of the trauma of the fire. Second, many illnesses associated with deprivation - the residents of Grenfell were amongst the 10% most deprived in England - such as diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure and cholesterol are likely exacerbated by their having to live in hotel or B&B accommodation where control over diet is more difficult to exercise.
Psychological and Emotional Harms
Surviving the fire in Grenfell Tower is most obviously likely to have produced a whole gamut of searing psychological and emotional problems with which victims will live for years to come. These are likely to be associated with grief at the loss of loved ones, loss, too, of possessions which cannot be replaced, of pets, the recall of the horrors of exiting the building (and of seeing others unable to do so), guilt at survival, as well as horrors and guilt for bystanders and members of the emergency. These have all variously been reported in the aftermath of the fire. None are surprising. None are easily imaginable. None are, one suspects, easily remediable, not least given the parlous state of socially provided mental health services in the UK. In this context, within a month or so of the fire, reports began to circulate about suicide attempts and other manifestations of long term mental health problems, including PTSD, stress, depression and anxiety.

Image courtesy of Gerry Popplestone (Creative Commons)
Financial and Economic Harms
There is no way of knowing what financial costs were, and continue to be, incurred by former residents of the Tower, as well as those living in the vicinity (but they would include extra travel costs to work or school, the costs of eating out, of time off to attend meetings, funerals, medical appointments, and so on). Moreover these costs are dwarfed by those to local, regional and national economies which are likely to follow the fire. At the local level, the Council faces heavy financial costs following the fire. Costs to central Government will be significant. The costs of the inquiry itself are likely to run into millions. None of this is to mention the fallout costs for other councils across the country. Numerous councils have tested cladding on high rise tower bloc and other public buildings, notably hospitals, and many are seeking central Government funding for major cladding-replacement programmes.

Thus, these economic effects of Grenfell Tower are not confined to residents, the local community or even the borough - there are ripple effects that are flowing and will continue to flow through communities across the UK. This in turn means that those who are most dependent upon central or local services and facilities - those with the least financial independence - will be hardest hit. The poor, the disabled and the sick, those on various forms of benefits, children in the mainstream school system, and, with no little irony, those in social housing or who lack access to adequate or any accommodation at all, all will be impacted upon. The least hardest-hit will be the most financially independent - the wealthiest.
Cultural and Relational Harms
A further, discrete category of harms I label here as cultural and relational. In terms of cultural harms, it is clear that in their physical relocation from the Tower and area - their dispersal - that many of both the routines and the networks which constitute social life - at school, the local shops, around the flats and so on - have been rent asunder. They have lost their social networks and social supports when they need them most; dispersal does not just mean loss of community, it can mean isolation, desperation or, at best, a state of painful limbo.

More than this, there are relational harms that follow from mis-trust of central and local Government, each of which were absent in the immediate aftermath of the fire, and for which PM May apologised. In terms of central Government, the uncertain nature of the ' amnesty' offered to so-called 'illegal immigrants' (a harmful term in itself) was one such source of anxiety. Another was the palpable failure to meet the commitment made by the Prime Minister in the immediate aftermath of the fire - namely that "every person made homeless would receive an offer of accommodation within three weeks". In fact, this was subsequently " clarified" as meaning temporary accommodation. Exactly six months after the fire, four of out five of the households requiring accommodation have not been permanently rehoused. Also, contrary to assurances from Government, local residents were not consulted before the appointment of Judge Sir Martin Moore-Bick to lead the Public Inquiry in the light of which Justice4Grenfell concluded that this " further compounds the survivors and residents sense of distrust in the official response to this disaster ".

In many senses, there has been a contempt displayed towards the residents after the fire - one which entirely reproduced the attitudes displayed towards local residents prior to it. In fact, some recognised this contempt as a cause of the fire per se: as one resident stated outside the tower as it continued to burn, " We're dying in there because we don't count." As the Inquiry opens this week, the demands that the voices of the residents must be heard and must count seem ever more pressing in the light of the unfolding, complexly interacting and layered harms which many of them continue to endure.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Steve Tombs, Professor of Criminology, The Open University Exactly six months ago, a fire broke out in Grenfell Tower, a 24-storey tower block on the Lancaster West estate in North Kensington, west London. Grenfell was and is many things: a tragedy, an outrage, a testimony to the violence of austerity, the biggest fire in...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Oxford Academic (Oxford University Press)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Steve Case, author of Criminology, explains what makes criminology such a fascinating area of study and how students should approach their learning. www.oup.com/academic/product/9780198736752 Steve Case is Professor of Criminology at Loughborough University. Alongside Phil Johnson, David Manlow, Roger Smith, and Kate Williams, he writes Criminology, a new core, introductory textbook for undergraduates.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
People upset with #MeToo should consider whether they're comfortable with norms that say anything short of rape is OK

here's a modern feminist adage that women need to "ask for more". We've been taught to underestimate our value - whether in salary negotiations or personal relationships - and if women just demanded what we're really worth, we're told, we might just get it.

But if the backlash to #MeToo has shown us anything, it's that people don't much like it when women refuse to settle for the bare minimum. The current criticism of the movement - sparked in earnest by accusations against Aziz Ansari - really comes down to outrage that women would dare ask for more.

It's one thing for us to ask men to stop raping us, or to not rub their erections against us while we walk by at the office; the law already says these things are wrong. But wanting men to only have sex with women who enthusiastically say yes - rather than those so worn down they stop saying no - is apparently a bridge too far.

We're told romance wouldn't survive if men couldn't pursue women who said "no" the first time, or that men are hormonally destined to have brutal sexualities. Most of all, I keep hearing that men who have behaved like Ansari have done nothing wrong. That they haven't broken the law.

But #MeToo is not about what's legal, it's about what's right. It's true that women are fed up with sexual violence and harassment; but it's also true that what this culture considers "normal" sexual behavior is often harmful to women, and that we want that to stop, too.

In a horrifying but brilliant piece for The Week, Lili Loofbourow writes about how often women are in pain during sex - a fact often ignored by culture and science, so long as men are still having "good" sex. We live in a world, essentially, that "sees female pain as normal and male pleasure as a right".

That's why women are more focused on shifting norms than enforcing the ones we already have. But for the people who thought #MeToo would stop at rape or serial sexual harassment, this feels like "overstepping". It's far easier for men to agree to simply follow the law than it is to rethink all they've been taught about sex, desire and power. That would require work beyond wearing a "Times Up" pin or retweeting a hashtag.

The people who are outraged - or even just concerned - about the direction of this movement should ask themselves whether they're comfortable with sexual norms that say anything short of rape is okay. Or if they want a world where women's pain and fear is treated as an expected part of romantic and sexual interactions.

Right now, women are asking for more than the bare minimum they've been taught to expect. They're asking for a standard of behavior that sees them as full human beings rather than sexual objects. They're demanding that their desires and safety are universally accepted in the way that men's are.

The "more" they want is really not that much at all. In truth, it's the least we could do.

Jessica Valenti is a Guardian columnist

Sign up for the Guardian US opinion newsletter
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
#Me Too is about more than stopping rape. We demand more | Jessica Valenti

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
People upset with #MeToo should consider whether they're comfortable with norms that say anything short of rape is OK here's a modern feminist adage that women need to "ask for more". We've been taught to underestimate our value - whether in salary negotiations or personal relationships - and if women just demanded what we're really worth, we're told, we might just get it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Knife crime driven by 'gangsters and criminals'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Labour MP David Lammy asks about the effects of cuts to police and Border Force services on UK crime levels.

# data[].attributes.body
Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
All content © 2018 Leeds University Library. All Rights Reserved

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The rise in crime in England and Wales is accelerating, according to police figures, which show a 14% year-on-year increase in offences recorded by forces across England and Wales.

Knife crime has gone up even more steeply, by 21% in the 12 months to September, and gun crime has risen by 20%, according to quarterly figures released on Thursday.

Police chiefs said the increases - including a 32% rise in domestic burglary to 261,965 offences and an 18% rise in vehicle-related crimes (443,577 offences) alongside the sharp rises in violent crime - marked a turning point after more than 20 years of sustained falls in these categories.

"Today's police officers are dealing with more complex crime, more safeguarding and protecting vulnerable people and an unprecedented terror threat, as well as tackling some of the genuine rises in knife and gun crime, robbery, burglary and vehicle-related crime - crimes which turn the trend on many years of reductions," said chief constable Bill Skelly, of the National Police Chiefs' Council.

Meanwhile, official figures show that the number of police officers in England and Wales has fallen by 930 in the past 12 months, to 121,929, the lowest level since comparable records began in 1996. Police officer numbers are now 22,424 below their peak in 2009, when there were 144,353 officers.

Police recorded crime

Crime survey figures

Growing political concern is likely over police numbers as recorded crime accelerates further, from a 6% increase recorded in the 12 months to September 2015 to 8% in the year to September 2016 and to 14% in the latest figures.

The increases in knife and gun crime are particularly alarming, with 37,443 recorded knife offences and 6,694 gun offences in the past 12 months.

The rise in the police crime figures compares, however, with a 10% fall in crime as measured by the Crime Survey of England and Wales, partly caused by a reduction of 15% in levels of fraud and online computer misuse offences. The crime survey measures people's experience of crime, based on 40,000 interviews, but is less effective than the police recorded crime figures in measuring low-volume violent crime.

Mark Bangs, of the Office for National Statistics, said: "These latest [crime survey] figures indicate that levels of crime have continued to fall compared with the previous year, but this picture varied across different types of crime and not all offence types showed falls.

"While overall levels of violent crime were not increasing, there is evidence of rises having occurred in some of the low-incidence but more harmful categories such as knife and gun crime. The first year-on-year comparisons from new estimates of fraud, one of the most frequently occurring crimes, indicate fewer incidents were experienced by the general population compared with the previous year."

The increasing levels of gun and knife offences - so-called "high-harm, low-volume" crimes - and accelerating trends in other forms of violent crime, as well as a 36% rise in stalking and harassment and a 29% rise in robbery, will set alarm bells ringing in Downing Street.

The shadow home secretary, Diane Abbott, said the rise in recorded crime was "truly shocking and should put an end to government complacency on crime".

She added: "The Tories are failing in a basic duty to protect the public. They have now cut over 21,000 police officers since 2010, leaving forces across the country understaffed and overstretched. Police numbers are now at their lowest in 30 years. You can't fight crime on the cheap."

The home secretary, Amber Rudd, acknowledged the rise in police recorded crime but said much of the increase could be explained by changes in police recording practices and a greater willingness of victims to come forward.

"So far we have seen that crimes measured by the survey - the best measure of crime as it reflects the public's experience of crime - has fallen since 2010, but we have also seen a rise in police recorded crime over the past few years," she said.

"The Office for National Statistics is clear that much of it can be explained by significant improvements in police recording practices and more victims having the confidence to come forward, particularly in cases of sexual violence and domestic abuse: both things that I welcome."
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rise in recorded crime is accelerating in England and Wales

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The rise in crime in England and Wales is accelerating, according to police figures, which show a 14% year-on-year increase in offences recorded by forces across England and Wales. Knife crime has gone up even more steeply, by 21% in the 12 months to September, and gun crime has risen by 20%, according to quarterly figures released on Thursday.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Police culture, Thinking Allowed - BBC Radio 4

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Police culture and socialisation - how has it changed?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Professor Joe Sim is a criminologist at Liverpool John Moores University. In this edition of Critical Perspectives Joe talks to Anthony Killick about the various ways in which working class and minority groups are criminalised through seemingly benign processes such as city regeneration and media representation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Few (if any) of us have abstained from crime completely. And recognizing our own criminality is often an important first step in understandi...