FREE ESSAY ON SOCIOLOGY OF CORRECTIONS

SOCIOLOGY OF CORRECTIONS

Typically, there are four justifications for punishment that are still used today in the
United States: Retribution, deterrence, incapication, and rehabilitation. There are many
ways of reaching these justifications besides prison today, which are made to help the
current problems in the criminal justice system. There are many different views about the
effectiveness of these justifications, and with all of the problems in the criminal
justice system many questions are left unanswered today, such as......
How well do the realities of the correctional enterprise concur with these justifications
of punishment ?
Reality in this aspect generally means the rate of recidivism for a given offender.
According to Marquart and Sorensen, It may be possible to manipulate certain gross
features of the existing, conceptional prison system- such as length of sentence and
degree of security- in order to affect these recidivism rates.  (Correctional Contexts,
Roxbury Publishing company, 1997, pg. 299 ) The recidivism rates for any given offender
depend upon a lot of variables, one of which being, time of sentence. One harsh reality
of the correctional enterprise is that the majority of the correctional institutions in
the United States today are over crowded. A 1992 survey said that, there are 3,500 county
jails in the United States today, and there are 400,000 inmates inhabiting them. ( Class
discussion, September 20 ) This makes time of sentence difficult to be fair about when
there is no room to house an offender, even if he does deserve it. 
In light of what we know about corrections, how successful are we in achieving these
goals?
Which should society use retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, or rehabilitation?
Justifications for specific sanctions overlap considerably. A term of imprisonment may be
philosophically justified by its primary goal of retribution but also serve the secondary
functions of deterrence and incapacitation. ( American Corrections, West/Wadsworth, 2000,
pg. 6 1 ) Judges try and impliment sentences for these three justifications as often as
possible when it fits the crime, however rehabilitation according to Clear and Cole
conflict with the other three justifications. ...Rehabilitation clearly conflicts with
the other goals. For example, the deterrent power of incarceration depends primarily on
being unpleasant. If incarceration consists mainly of a pleasant rehabilitative
experience, its deterrent power is lost. ( American Corrections, West/Wadsworth, 2000,
pg. 6 1 ) This obviously puts a lot more pressure on the correctional program, especially
the judge and jury who are imposing the punishment. I would imagine that in most cases we
are very successful in achieving retribution, deterrence, and incapacitation, however
rehabilitation is used only if it deems itself to be absolutely necessary. Which in a lot
of peoples opinions, rehabilitation should be the first thing on the agenda of the courts
for each offender, however, that's not the case.
How do current problems in corrections exacerbate the burden of justifying punishment ?
The current problems in corrections completely intensify the burden of decision making
when it comes to the criminal process. This is one of the main reasons that we have so
many new approaches for punishment rather then using incarceration. Probation,
restitution and fines, community service, substance abuse treatment, day reporting, house
arrest and electronic monitoring, halfway house, and boot camp ( American Corrections,
West/Wadsworth, 2000, pg. 6 2-63 ) all of theseforms of punishment are available to help
the courts decide something else to do with offenders rather then imprisonment. Currently
there are 4 million American's under some kind of correctional authority, and 1.8 million
are incarcerated ( Class discussion, September 7 ) With the serious problem of
correctional institutions being over crowded, it doesn't help the institution itself, as
well as not helping the inmate. This is not including the amount of money that it costs
just to keep one person incarcerated for a period of time. With all of this in mind, come
all of these new punishments that help relieve some of the burden of decision making on
the correctional world.
Is imprisonment philosophically justified ?
In my opinion, imprisonment is absolutely philosophically justified. When a given
individual breaks the laws mandated by society, he/she needs to be punished. I personally
believe in the middle eastern philosophy of an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.
In America, if you are incarcerated, your entitled to three meals a day; as well as color
t.v., working out and social time, schooling, and learning a trade. Is this really
teaching a lesson, or deterring criminals from wanting to commit crime again ? Especially
the criminal that is of low economic status with no education, which according to class
discussion also has the highest rate of recidivism. I would rather be in jail where I
could get three meals a day for free, then have to steal for my food on a daily basis.
However, in the middle east, if you are cought stealing, they chop off your hand. If I
had ever seen anyone walking around with a nub for a hand, I would never steal a thing in
my life !!! People have to be punished though, you could not go through society, not
obide by the law, and expect not to be punished for it. If everyone had a little religion
in their life, there would be a lot less crime then there is today because people would
understand that god will take care of you if you allow him to be a part of your life. 
Bibliography
not necessary