Goals/Justifications for CorrectionsGoals/Justifications for Corrections

Deterrence◦General vs. Specific◦Contrast Effect

Incapacitation ◦Selective vs. General

Rehabilitation/Reintegration◦Restorative Justice

Retribution/Just Desert ◦Non-utilitarian

The History of Corrections The History of Corrections

Importance◦Many issues/problems have been a part of

corrections sine the earliest written records◦Many failed ideas get repeated ◦Understand the current corrections landscape

Earliest Written Legal CodesEarliest Written Legal Codes

Code of Hammurabi (1772 BC), Roman 12 Tables (450 BC)◦Emphasized retribution (lex talionis)◦Punishments ranged from fines to death◦Generally, crime was a private matter

Exception = Hammurabi ◦Different sanctions based on status

Feudal SocietyFeudal Society

Europe 9th-15th Century AD◦Subordinates

Slaves, serfs, etc. dealt with by the lord of the manor absolute authority

◦Freedmen settle conflicts “personally” Revenge / vengeance + feuds Reconciliation (buy off revenge)

11stst SHIFT: Private SHIFT: Private Public Public

First “principalities” in 12th Century Shift from private to territorial lords Princes powerful enough to monopolize

punishment and push back private vengence By 1500, government “corrections” overcomes

traditions of private restitution and/or revenge Uneven and slow process

Inquisitorial court system wins out over accusatorial system ◦ The “state” can prosecute the case without the victim

Ex officio

Form of Early State CorrectionsForm of Early State Corrections

BRUTAL physical punishment / death◦Molten lead down the shirt, drawing and

quartering, burning, etc.PUBLIC spectacle

◦In part, an effort to demonstrate that the government has a monopoly on the “legitimate” use of violence

From public brutality to private From public brutality to private (indoors) punishment(indoors) punishment

Eventually, corrections changes into the form we recognize today

No more molten lead down the front of the shirt, but still corporal punishment

Punishment becomes less “public” Why?? Spierenburg’s explanation?

Transformation of sensibilities (Enlightenment) State no longer needs to prove itself

From Medieval Europe to Colonial From Medieval Europe to Colonial America America

England◦Corporal, Capital◦Transportation◦Pre-Prisons

Galley Slavery Prison Hulks Debtor’s Prisons Houses of Corrections

◦ John Howard as first major “prison reformer”

Colonial AmericaColonial America(1600-1750)(1600-1750)

Nature of Society◦Calvinist doctrine

Crime not a “problem” (fact of life)◦ Crimes/sins all treated similarly

Control through family training/community cohesion◦ Insiders vs. Outsiders

Nature of Punishment◦Borrow heavily from England

Corporal, Capital, Banishment Public Sparse use of prisons

Enlightenment and ChangeEnlightenment and Change (1770s-1820) (1770s-1820)

Population boom and shift from agrarian to industrial economy

EnlightenmentProduces alarm/dismay but also optimism

◦First “burst of enthusiasm” (deterrence) Reform the legal code knife away from Brits

◦ Start with eliminating capital punishments for most crime Substitute prisons for corporal/capital punishment

The Second Major Shift in The Second Major Shift in CorrectionsCorrections

Prison displaces corporal/capital punishment as the primary form of corrections First wave of prison building (1790-1800)

◦Not yet “reform” model—the legal code (not prison) was to greatly reduce crime. More rational and certain than “British” legal code.

◦“A repulsion from the gallows rather than any faith in the penitentiary spurred the late-18th Century construction”

From deterrence to penance From deterrence to penance (1820-1850) (1820-1850)

By 1820, the luster of the classical school (and associated reforms) fades◦ No crime reduction, trouble with prisons◦ Still, very optimistic (“impulse to reform”)

The Invention of the Penitentiary ◦ A “PROPER” penitentiary will reform offenders

PN vs. Auburn debate◦ Reflects new understanding of cause of crime

Prison “ideal” largely matched by practice◦Adequate funding, low crowding (Honeymoon)

The Great DebateThe Great Debate

Pennsylvania Separate AND Silent model gets competition

Auburn (New York)◦Auburn Prison opens in 1818, adopts Walnut St. Jail

(to become PN model) ideas in 1821 Not a good architectural fit, other problems…

◦Reform through discipline/obedience, labor (inmates congregate to work, but lockstep, etc) Contract labor system

Not much of a “Debate,” but Auburn Model wins out…..WHY?

Southern/Western PenologySouthern/Western Penology

Often neglected topic in corrections textsCorrections less centralized

◦Justice dispensed at county level (not state)Prisons develop differently

◦In South, race and the “Black codes”◦Economic differences

Little $ to build prisons (civil war decimation) Different economy

◦The “LEASE SYSTEM”◦Penal Farms

The New Penology The New Penology (1870-1900)(1870-1900)

By 1860, enthusiasm for penitentiaries wanes ◦Corruption, corporal punishment, crowding...

Wardens give up on ideal and seek to maintain order Even Eastern Penitentiary gives up “separate” model in

1886

1870 National Prison Congress◦Leads to “Declaration of Principles”

Reaffirm reform over punishment Indeterminate sentences Parole Separate institutions for females and juveniles

◦The lockstep, rules of silence, isolation, etc = humiliating and unproductive

◦Elmira as “test case” for new “Reformatory”

Progressive EraProgressive Era1900-19601900-1960

Progressives = middle/upper class reformers◦Great optimism + belief in government◦Sought to eradicate all sorts of social ills◦Crime?

General reform (poverty reduction, fix slums) Embrace new penology

◦ Indeterminate sentences + parole boards/supervision◦ Juvenile Justice System◦Probation

The Medical Model and The Medical Model and “Rehabilitative Ideal” “Rehabilitative Ideal”

By 1940s, social sciences gain prestige◦Psychiatry, psychology, sociology

Rehabilitative Ideal (1940s-1960s) Causes of crime are unique (social, psychological) The goal of corrections is to identify and

eliminate/correct these causes (rehabilitation) Treatment must be individualized

◦Corrections workers and judges must be trusted with a great deal of discretion

1960s Corrections becomes 1960s Corrections becomes professionalizedprofessionalized

Rehab as unquestioned goal (in rhetoric at least) of Corrections system◦American Corrections Association (from

American Prison Association)◦Correctional Facilities

Standards for “correctional officers”All kinds of new Rx programs

◦College education, group counseling, therapeutic milieu, behavior modification

ProgressivesProgressives Radicals, Radicals, Change...Change...(1960s-1980)(1960s-1980)

Social Context of 1960s◦Contrast with “progressive optimism/faith”◦Many progressives turn more radical

Labeling theory ascends avoid “doing harm” Martinson Report “nothing works”

◦Liberals embrace the “JUSTICE MODEL” ◦Conservatives have different take on ’60s

Crime = symbol of all the “DISORDER” Solution = go back to classical school

Uneasy AllianceUneasy Alliance

Conservatives and liberals agree on:◦The need to limit sentencing discretion

Conservatives = liberal judges Liberals = corrupt, racist judges/parole boards Solution = return to determinate sentencing,

sentencing guidelines, etc◦Only difference is on length of sentences

Liberals = do less harm, be fair (justice model) Conservatives = punishment WORKS!

The Crime Control EraThe Crime Control Era

1975-2000◦Prison as Crime Prevention

Sentencing Guidelines/Policy◦Punishment Programs

Boot Camps, “Shock Incarceration,” ISP, Scared Straight!, Chain Gangs, Sherriff Joe…

◦Political Rhetoric Democrats Begin to Pile on the “get tough”

bandwagon

What Era Now? What Era Now?

Liberals◦ Rehabilitation◦ Restorative Justice

Conservatives?◦ Problem Oriented Policing◦ Zeal for prison has waned, less of political issue

(terrorism, abortion, budget deficit, healthcare…)New Trends

◦Evidence-Based Corrections◦Public Health Approach