Prisons Punishment Sentencing
Question: 'Are prison sentences effective in deterring re-offending?' The subject is theories of punishment and sentencing. Please include relevant books such as 'Sentencing & Criminal Justice' by Ashworth and 'The Penal System - an introduction' by Cavadino and Dignan, other text books are welcome but must include the two mentioned.
The Legal Purposes of prisons are custody coercion and punishment and after three decades of passing laws and implementing policies designed to dramatically increase the nation's prison population and harden the conditions of confinement, there is a newfound interest among policy makers and criminologists on prisoner release. The effect of the increase is that prisons are seldom out of the news. Prisons are costly; overcrowded despite the government's rapid building and renovation programmes. This has produced a conspicuous failure in terms of the subsequent behaviour of those committed them. Almost three quarters of all young offenders and almost half of all adults commit another crime three years after their release.
In 1996 the home office published a paper: Home Office (1996) Protecting the Public: The Governments Strategy on Crime in England and Wales, CM 3087 London: Home Office, which outlined the government's intention to purse policies which would significantly increase the prison population. The UK Home Secretary believes the increase in prison population has caused the drop in crime, and maintains that certain imprisonment is the best deterrent. He proposes mandatory life sentences for second-time sexual or violent offences and minimum sentences for career burglars and drug dealers. This of course suggests that the government felt at one time that custodial sentences improved crime rates of new offenders and of re offenders. However in 1999 The Home Office confirmed (Digest 4, from the Home Office's Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, 1999.) what some penologists have been saying for quite a time. In terms of reconvictions, a custodial sentence is no more effective than a non-custodial one, when allowances are made for differing genders, ages, previous records and other variables associated with recidivism.
Rates of re-offending depend on so many other variables other than whether or not there has been a prison sentence. Many re offenders come from deprived backgrounds. Although common perceptions are that criminality is directly affected by poverty and unemployment, this should be challenged as the picture really is not that simple. One analysis would suggest that poverty is only a major factor in criminality if wealth is given great status in society and/or if it leads to some groups or individuals being deprived of the necessities of life. This leads us to consider both income inequality and relative deprivation. Stack (1984) suggests that it is not just the inequality itself which affects the crime rate but the feeling that such inequality is unfair, this is relative deprivation. This is likely to affect the crime more in societies where wealth is the ultimate goal. Box (1987) considers sixteen studies carried out in 1974 and 1985 and noted that eleven of the studies found that there was a close statistical link between income inequality and crime.
Patterson's study (1991) shows a slightly different view and she in fact discovered no link between relative poverty and inequality and crime, not even property crime such as burglary. She did not consider that absolute poverty directly caused the criminality but rather that the lack of money eroded the usual social controls. Unemployment will generally increase in times of depression and decrease in times of prosperity. Therefore if crime increases with unemployment this might suggest a feeling of inequality and this may be reflected in economic position; the pure fact of poverty or boredom and free time might also be factors in the equation.
It was Lawton LJ who set out the four classic sentencing principles, which were divided into two groups. In the first group are sentences reflecting retribution and deterrence. These sentences-imprisonment, fines, detention for young offenders-should reflect a tariff or be proportionate to the seriousness of the offence. In the second group are individual sentences such as probation or hospital orders which are not intended to be proportionate and are aimed at prevention (hospital order) or rehabilitation (probation). The choice between these two groups of sentence is the primary choice, although the first and most important aspect of making the choice is to consider the seriousness of the offence and therefore a tariff or proportionate sentence is likely to be considered before an individualised sentence.
As for custodial sentences, the American crime writer, the late John D. MacDonald, put it most succinctly, 'The only thing that prisons demonstrably cure is heterosexuality.'
It is not the danger of retribution which is necessarily the most important, it is the danger of imitation. Time and again those of us with any in-depth knowledge of criminals have said that (1) they do not believe they will be caught, (2) if caught that they do not believe they will be convicted and (3) if by any mischance, they are, they will not go to prison. Anything less than an immediate custodial sentence is regarded as an acquittal and a minor inconvenience.
There has recently been the highly publicised case of a man who was convicted of a long-thought-through, clever and nearly successful plot to obtain 1 million by deception. He pleaded not guilty and was convicted after a trial lasting the better part of three weeks. No remorse, no early plea-yet he received a non-custodial sentence. Every fact may not have been in the public domain, but on the face of it this can only diminish the public's regard for justice. If a man can barefacedly try to steal a million and not receive a custodial sentence, why should I not help myself to the shelves of the local supermarket or steal a credit card? To eliminate the deterrent element from sentencing is bad for society. Just as there is no longer any stigma in giving birth out of wedlock, there is now much less social stigma in acquiring a conviction. In many circles both are regarded as status symbols.
Sentencing policy on a national level is seen by prisoners as a postcode lottery. An offence that attracts a sentence of five years in one part of the country will result in a 15-year sentence in another. Sentencing for non-violent crimes has gone through the roof. It is certainly out of proportion with violent crimes. When looking at issues of recategorisation, sentence planning and parole, the prime considerations, are, quite correctly, risk factors; whether the prisoner will be a risk to the public. What seems to be lost amongst the bureaucracy is the fact that those who are sent to prison for long sentences, for non-violent crimes, are less of a risk to the public than a burglar who goes equipped with a weapon. This anomaly in sentencing is worrying, particularly in the current climate of overcrowding. Simply to avoid sending first time burglars to prison does nothing to alleviate the frustration and resentment felt by long-term, non-violent offenders.
Rehabilitation in prison is considered by most prisoners to be a fallacy. Members of staff appointed as a prisoner's personal officer are overworked, reports for parole boards by probation and psychology departments are often late, and frequently inaccurate. Many courses are only available at selected establishments, prisoners are consistently allotted a particular course, only to find that they cannot get a place at any of the prisons that run it.
As Peter Lewis points out it is extremely naive to assume that locking someone up for a long period is going to result in the discharge of a rehabilitated individual. With most of us believing that rehabilitation by courses does not really work, what then do we see as helping to prevent reoffending? The answer is training and education. Too few establishments have the provision to provide any sort of training that will allow prisoners to leave prison with a chance of being competitive in the job market. We enter the world of the gainfully employed with the stigma of prison attached. This, in itself, is difficult to overcome, but, without any job skills, even those who are rehabilitated by courses will inevitably succumb to the temptation of crime. Far too many prisons have, whether consciously or not, evolved from training establishments to labour camps, where mundane work is undertaken for private firms, providing the Prison Service with an additional revenue. In conclusion it would appear that prison does little to prevent those who are determine to re offend and location, environment, wealth and lifestyle have a greater effect on whether or not a person re offend. It is therefore suggested that the government should focus on the improving the conditions for those who live in poverty or are off an ethnic minority, .i.e. by improving the cause of the problem rather than the result of the problem.
Bibliography
Austin J, (2001), Prisoner Re -entry: Current Trends, Practices and Issues, Crime and Delinquency, July 2001 v47 i3 p314 (21)
Austin J & Hardyman P, The Risks and Needs of the Returning Prisoner Population, Review of Policy Research vol 21 number 1 pp13-29
Banks C and Fairhead S (1976), The Petty Short-Term Prisoner, Howard League and Barry Rose
Beyns K and Snakcen S (1996) Prison Privatisation: An International Perspective,
Braitwaite J (1979) Inequality, Crime and Public Policy, London: Routledge and Kegan
Brody S (1976), The Effectiveness of Sentencing, Home Office Research Study, No 35 London: HMSO
Burke, R.H. (2003), An Introduction to Criminological Theory, Willan Publishing, Oregon.
Carroll L and Jackson P (1993) Inequality, Opportunity and Crime Rates in Central Cities Criminology vol 21 p.178
Cloward R and Ohlin L (1960) Delinquency and Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Gangs New York: Free Press
Cohen, L.E., and Felson, M. (1979) Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach, American Sociology Review, 44: 588-608.
Creswell, J.W. (2002) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, SAGE Publications, London
Daems T, (2004), Is it all Right for You to Talk? Restorative Justice and the Social Anaylasis of Penal Developments, European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice Volume 12 Number 2
Danziger S and Wheeler D (1975) The Economics of Crime: Punishment or Income Redistribution? Review of Social Economy vol 33 p 113
Glaser D and Rice K (1959) Crime Age and Employment, American Sociological Review vol 24 p.679
Hagan J (1993) The Social Embeddedness of Crime and Unemployment Criminology vol 31 p.465
Hagan F (2004) Introduction to Criminology: Theories, Methods and Criminal Behaviour London: Wadsworth
Howard M, (1996) In Defence of Prisons, The Economist June 22 1996 v339 n7971 p56 (2)
Home Office (1996) Protecting the Public: The Governments Strategy on Crime in England and Wales, CM 3087 London: Home Office
Jewkes Y & Letherby G (2003) Criminology: A Reader London: Sage
Lea J and Young J (1984) What is to be Done about Law and Order? Harmondsworth: Penguin
Long S and Witte A (1981) Current Economic Trends: Implications for Crime and Criminal Justice, In K N Wright (eds), Crime and Criminal Justice in a Declining Economy Massachusetts: Oelgeschlager, Gunn and Hain
Maguire M, Morgan R and Reiner R (1997) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Maxfield, G.M., Babbie, E. (2001), Research Methods for Criminal Justice and Criminology, Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, California.
Mirrlees -Black C, Budd T, Partridge S, Mayhew P (1998) The 1998 British Crime Survey: England and Wales. London: HMSO (Home Office Statistical Bulletin)
Muncie J and McLaughlin E (1999) The Problem of Crime London: Sage
Pelissier B. The effects of a rapid increase in a prison population; a pre- and posttest study, Criminal Justice and Behaviour, Dec 1991 v18 n4 p427-447
Probation Circular 44/1 998 HDC The Role of the Probation Service
Rutherford A, (1997), Labour and the Prison Number Crisis, New Law Journal vol 147 No 6799 p1004
Soothill K & Francis B, (2004), Fewer Convicted but More Imprisoned: Probing the Problem over the Past 40 Years, Magistrate v60 pt 5 p144-145
Vold G and Bernard T (1986) Theoretical Criminology, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Williams K (1997) Textbook on Criminology London: Blackstone Press Ltd
Please note: The above essays and dissertations were written by students and then submitted to us to display and help others. Thanks to all the students who have submitted their work to us.
Was this useful to you?
Did you find this article useful? Was the content up-to-date or do you have something to add? Give us your feedback and we'll make this site even better for you to use!
