Rethinking corrections systems and reform approaches

Curtis Durham

M1D1

I agree that the cultural context in which a criminal justice system is located has a substantial effect upon how crimes and the rehabilitation of criminals are viewed. For example, drug addiction is now viewed as more of an illness, versus a moral failing. The impact that the environment can have upon the criminal after release is also assessed when trying to reintegrate him or her back into society. A purely punitive approach is no longer seen as an effective deterrent to crime: thanks to greater scientific study, we know as a society that the personal and macro-level conditions that produced the crime must be taken into consideration.

JOHN RHODES

OVERCROWDING AND SENTENCE REFORM

Fortunately, all criminals of all varieties are not treated as they were during the Middle Ages and the need to give people a 'second chance' and to treat criminals with compassion is acknowledged! Along with questions of efficacy, it is interesting how factors such as overcrowding have produced changes in policies towards inmates. Technically, if one takes the view that the purpose of punishment is to rehabilitate the offender and extract retribution, practical considerations should not matter, but they have to be taken into account given the scarcity of financial resources. However, I think your analysis about the number of persons incarcerated for drug -- related crimes (crimes which are motivated from biological addiction or a lack of economic opportunity) also shows how alternative sentencing is needed to get at the root of these crimes, regardless of whether overpopulation is a problem or not.

CURTIS DURHAM

M1D2

I agree with you that to some extent all modern philosophies of justice are underlined by ideas of retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and incapacitation, although different people emphasize these components to different degrees. The idea of retribution sees the criminal as a rational actor who has willingly transgressed and thus deserves to be punished in the 'moral economy' of justice. Deterrence has a very practical purpose: to ensure criminals do not commit more crimes. The principle of deterrence also presumes that people who commit crimes are rational actors and make logical decisions weighing the costs and benefits of committing a crime. In contrast, rehabilitation focuses on changing the criminal morally (reintegration, a form of rehabilitation, specifically emphasizes the need for structured programs to reintegrate the offender). Both deterrence and rehabilitation focus on reducing the likelihood that crime will occur again, although rehabilitation takes a compassionate view of the offender as well as tries to prevent future victimization. Finally, incapacitation takes a slightly different emphasis of these other three methods: it tries to reduce the likelihood that crime will occur by separating the likely criminal and victim, such as restraining orders against accused perpetrators of domestic violence. These varied philosophies are not necessarily incompatible, but a different emphasis on different philosophies can create very unique approaches to the same crime.