Arguments Against Retributive Punishment

The tension between rehabilitation and punishment has been increasing dramatically. This is because there have been sharp rises in the prison population and repeat offender rates. When one area is over emphasized in relation to the other, there is the possibility that imbalances will occur. Over the course of time, these issues can create challenges that will impact the criminal justice system and society at large. (Gadek, 2010) (Clear, 2011) (Gatotch, 2011)

This essay will critically analyse and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of retributivism. Throughout history the term “retributivism” has had a diverse though correlated meanings. The most significant meaning of retributivism is righting or rebalancing the scale of justice, through the use of mechanisms such as punishment e.g. punishing criminals in order to achieve justice for the offence they have committed. Retributivism also looks back at the offence, since the offender has committed a wrongful offence which needs to be punished. One of the core reasons why offenders should be punished is that they need to ‘pay back’ for the offence they have committed; the theory that is associated with retributivism is the just deserts theory. A theory is a concept that is based upon a hypothesis that can be supported with evidence. The just desert theory is used to justify retributivism punishment. Unlike other theories of punishment that mainly concentrates on preventing future crime, such as rehabilitation, deterrence and reductivism. The retributivist theory primarily concentrates on punishing past crimes. Although others would disagree with this for the reason that they think punishment should be used to ‘reduce’ and ‘prevent future crimes’ (Carlsmith et al., 2002 p284). The essay will take into account the views of various theories; theorist and philosophers so that the strengths and weaknesses of

I am going to write an essay on the retributivist approach and reductivist approach on punishment, comparing and contrasting both theories. To start off I will talk about the retributivism theory and the belief that an offender should be punished based upon the severity of the offense. I will them move onto just deserts which Is a modern retributivist theory which only focuses on crimes that have already committed making sure individuals get there just deserts for doing wrong. Next I will write about the reductivist theory which is all about trying to deter individuals from committing a crime or reoffending. Jeremy Bentham had a huge impact on reductivism believing if pain was to outweigh pleasure then it would deter individuals and overall nobody would have the desire to commit a crime as they are aware of the consequences they would have to face. Moving on to deterrence will talk about the two different types of deterrence; individual and general deterrence. Individual deterrence focuses on stopping individuals from reoffending whereas general deterrence is about deterring individuals who have never even committed an offence from turning to crime. Once writing about both retributivism and reductivism I will start to compare and contrast both theories, looking at the similarities and differences. Finally I will give my own opinion on the theories and which theory I believe is best, talking about how retributivist and reductivist punishments are different and the good and

The way the criminal justice system should handle crimes has always been a debated subject. For over the last forty years, ever since the war on drugs, there are more policies made to be “tough on crime”. From then, correctional systems have grown and as people are doing more crimes, there are plenty of punishments for them. In the mid 1970’s, rehabilitation was the main concern for the criminal justice system. It was common that when someone was convicted of a crime, they would be sentenced to prison but there would also be diagnosed treatments to help them as well. Most likely, they would have committed a crime due to psychological problems. When they receive treatment in prison, they can be healed and would not go back to their wrong lifestyle they had lived before. As years have gone by, people thought that it was better to take a more punitive stance in the criminal justice system. As a result of the turnaround of this more punitive criminal justice system, the United States now has more than 2 million people in prisons or jails--the equivalent of one in every 142 U.S. residents--and another four to five million people on probation or parole. The U.S. has a higher percentage of the

As the imprisoned population in the United States grows and American culture changes, rehabilitation is becoming popular among these alternatives to a standard prison system. Rehabilitation when referring to criminal justice are programs and methods used to assist prisoners in reforming themselves in order to avoid the habits that placed them in prison in the first place. These programs are becoming more popular due to the high cost of imprisonment and a change in American culture. Each prisoner costs forty thousand dollars each year to keep in prison(Weissmueller). This is money that is coming out of the taxes paid by United States citizens who aren’t even in the prison system. Alongside this, American culture is changing to be supporting of rehabilitation efforts as Americans see the effectiveness of criminal justice systems that include it. This was seen on a trip to Europe by U.S. prison officials; once they had seen the effectiveness of German and Dutch prison rehabilitation, they wanted to bring similar programs to their prisons (“People, not prisoners”). A rehabilitation based criminal justice system in the United States is gaining popularity, and as it does so it is earning the attention it needs and deserves.

his paper examines multiple factors that help determine reasons for why there is such a great amount of people relapsing back into criminal behavior once released, which only leads them into a federal or state prison. Recidivism can be perceived into different category’s based upon the why factor. Criminal acts that result in rearrests, and reconviction or return to prison with or without new a new sentence during a three-year period following the prisoner’s release is considered recidivism. There are many different reasons why a person goes back into prison once being released, whether by choice or force or even just nature of habit. Many studies have been conducted to find a pattern or reason on why recidivism is so common. Available

More so, the article outlines the social implications of restorative justice in regards to the psychology of justice and how criminals can be rehabilitated. The article will provide for the importance of rehabilitation in place of punishment with the society in mind. 4. Riedl, Katrin, et al. "

The United States justice system can be described as a cycle, where people enter the prison system, are released, and upon failure to integrate into society soon find themselves back behind bars. Although the means in which the cycle is perpetuated can be argued, the rate of re-offenders is constantly trying to be reduced. One term used to define this type of convict is recidivism, which is the repeat criminal action of a convicted inmate. Recidivism is fastly becoming a issue in the United States as it has been shown that 70% of convicted offenders have been reconvicted within three years of release (Esperian, 2010, p. 322). As crime of any background can be detrimental to society, this high rate of reentry into the justice system has stimulated

Incarceration means considerably more than just putting an offender behind bars; punishment, deterrence, the protection of society and rehabilitation is essential in the criminal justice system. How the offender is punished will have an important role to play in determining the best form of punishment to protect society. This idea of criminal punishment through increasing the severity of penalty has been consistently used through history as the ideal way of punishment. Though it has been argued that this method is ineffective and that there are better ways to approach criminal punishment through less severe methods. Despite the ongoing movement towards a “Tough on crime” approach to sentencing, recent studies have proven this method of criminal punishment counterproductive; Instead an alternative approach of getting “Smart on Crime” through rehabilitative methods has proven to provide significantly better results in regards to recidivism and reintegration of offenders.

In this essay, I shall be focusing on the whether or Prisons rehabilitate offenders. I will

The present paper aims to discuss the role of prisons in the resocialization of the people kept in the incarcerated after their turned out to be guilty of committing some offence and the announcement of sentence against them from the court of law. The study will be conducted in the light of Conflict, Structural functional and Interactionsit perspectives in order to define and determine the role played by prisons in the rehabilitation of the offenders.

Recidivism is defined as the measurement of criminal actions which subsequently result in a new arrest, a conviction, or otherwise returning to prison within the time frame of three years after being previously released (http://www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/recidivism/Pages/welcome.aspx). Reducing recidivism rates would be an action which ideally would produce a situation of great good for not only the offender, but for the immediate community. This fulfills the basic principle of general utilitarianism, which is to provide the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people. As successful rehabilitative practices during incarceration would theoretically return a former offender to society as a productive, law abiding citizens, it would produce an outcome which would contributes to the overall common good, and therefore would be considered an effective method of utilitarian punishment. As punishment is only justified if the harm it consequentially prevents is greater than the harm it inflicts upon the offender, such practices are shown in even greater light as being an ethical and moral choice (citation). This is especially relevant when viewing other methods – such as deterrence – in a utilitarian light. Though the justification of deterrence in particular is largely prevalent within utilitarianism, by the philosophy of harm being justified only if it prevents greater harm than is inflicted, it is not an ethical or moral choice of action in every given situation (citation). If deterrence does not work, then the punishment intended for deterrence is not morally acceptable. If the criminal reoffends, then no harm is prevented – only

Over many years there has been great debate about whether rehabilitation reduces the rate of recidivism in criminal offenders. There has been great controversy over whether anything works to reduce recidivism and great hope that rehabilitation would offer a reduction in those rates. In this paper I will introduce information and views on the reality of whether rehabilitation does indeed reduce recidivism. Proposed is a quasi-experiment, using a group of offenders that received rehabilitation services and an ex post facto group that did not? I intend to prove that rehabilitation services do

One aspect of rehabilitation is the use of individualised sentences - penalties aimed at the individual needs of the offender. This is in direct contrast to the concept of set sentences seen in the aim of retribution. One of the criticisms of this approach is, therefore, that it leads to inconsistency in sentencing. Incapacitation means that in some way the offender is made incapable of re-offending.

How many inmates were isolated from their communities when they had committed a crime or when they got released from the prisons? And how many effective programs can be helpful for them?Many posts-release prisoners have experienced recidivism and social stigmas due to lack of programs. In fact, restorative justice for people in prison has played a big role in our correctional systems in many different ways.Restorative justice in prison shapes our prisoner 's morals and abilities by providing a suitable technique. Although punishment may play a part in restorative justice techniques, the central focus remains on relationships between the affected parties, and healing reached through a deliberative process guided by those affected parties.( Tsui,2014). For instance, many inmates have attended into reentry programs and educational orientations when they finished their time in prison. These programs cost less money for the government, and inmates can be reintegrated into societies easily. Many post-release prisoners have avoided recidivism after these effective programs taught them the value of lives. This study will examine the importance of restorative justice in prison, which is essential for our correctional facilities. Numerous studies have been done recently which focused on this restorative justice.For example, restorative justice answers the justice question in a different way.(Toews,p.5,2006).