Impact of Punishment and Rehabilitation

Norma West

CJA 500

May 31, 2010

Steven Duplissis


Impact of Punishment and Rehabilitation

Not a day goes by that one does not hear of, or read of a robbery, sexual assault, drug bust, murder or another crime. It is very easy to avoid the news, but the reality is we can all become potential victims of these horrible crimes. Until we become the victims of these crimes, we rarely think of the consequences, or the proper solutions needed to prevent the crime from happening again. What is needed to prevent crimes from happening? Does it involve punishment or rehabilitation? To answer this question, one must first look at several aspects of the criminal justice system. This paper will explore the impacts of punishment and rehabilitation and which makes a better deterrent. This paper will also deal with the impact that punishment and rehabilitation have upon crime, the victims and their families, the offender and reintegration back into society, as well as the social and fiscal impact on society. If punishment and rehabilitation can be used together, then it can effectively deter crime and have a positive impact on the offender, society and upon victims and their families.

One of the major concerns associated with punishment and rehabilitation is which deters crime more effectively? The purpose of deterrence according to author AK Larrabee is to “instill fear on the offender so that they will not commit a future crime” (Larrabee, 2006, p.2). Punishing offenders not only instills fear in society, but also demonstrates the lesson and consequences associated with committing a crime. One of the many goals of the criminal justice system is to not only punish the offenders and reduce the rate of crime, but to compensate and help the victims with the healing process. One form of punishment involves incarceration. Prison is viewed as a severe form of punishment for most people. The question is whether it is an effective form of punishment for offenders and potential offenders?

What is the true purpose behind our prison system? Many would say that it is to punish those who have committed a crime. According to Conservative House secretaries Douglas Hurd and David Waddington, prison is described as “an expensive way to make bad people worse” (Vanstone, 2008, p.64). Retribution, incapacitation and deterrence are three different types of punishments associated with incarceration and have raised many questions into the effectiveness of each one of these types of punishment and whether or not they are effective in the way that they were initially and originally put into place.

The first form of punishment is retribution. The purpose of retribution is to deprive criminals of their freedom in a way of making them pay their debts to society for their crimes. It was designed to give society closure for a person’s actions.  Incapacitation is the belief that they can no longer harm innocent people because they are separated from the community; the criminal is essentially powerless and their rights are revoked. Deterrence is a form of punishment based on fear. The fear is created through exemplifying previous crimes and their punishments. This justification is based on the fact that when someone sees what could happen to them if they commit a crime, it will then result in keeping them from doing the same.

Join now!

The intention of prisons is to keep dangerous criminals off the streets and create a deterrent for committing a crime. Instead, Tewksburg (2008) argues that prisons are now “expensive, occasionally violent, overcrowded and under-staffed” (p.208). As a result, prisons are unable to carry out their intended purpose. Prisons are constantly being constructed and are filled to capacity. Prisons simply do not eliminate crime and criminal behavior.  In fact, in the United States, in many instances, the recidivism rate is quite high, and the costs for taxpayers are billions of dollars (Larrabee, 2006, p.2). Prisons do very little to improve offenders ...

This is a preview of the whole essay