January 24, 2011
-Headings are good. Use a simple, short introduction that isn’t overly dramatic. No argument, but a clear direction. It’s a
research paper, not argumentative paper. Use simple sentences, definitions, lists, and paragraphs. If you are citing a
study to make your point, cite what they studied, and what they found. You don’t need to go into a huge writing of their
methodology, etc. Nice short conclusion. Use 2, 3, or 4 substantive sections. You should have a minimum of about 2-3
History of Social Control Practices
• Practices like ideas change over time
• The history of control practices isn’t linear, it’s messy.
o They don’t change in a linear way because there are a lot of actors that play within any given social
control field. In terms of prisons, for example, there are a lot of people with a vested interest in
prisons. Thus, some may want to push things in certain directions, or undercut the efforts of others,
etc. Thus, it can result in a messy mix or hybrid of different trends. At the same time, these trends can
be contradicted by counterforces as well.
o Trends can also come out of different places with different actors behind them.
o Harm reduction looks to manage consequences and that is what Insight does (controls drugs and
allows people to get clean needles and such). This approach is different from the one the government
would use, however.
Early History of Penal-Welfarism
• Mid 19 century in England
• Effort to control the disorderly
o Poor houses and policing as we know it
o Here we are talking about the early history of penal welfarism. The question is what do we do with all
these social problems? Well we begin to see efforts to deal with the social problems like policing, etc.
Before this, policing wasn’t a separate body on the streets responsible for ensuring order. Prior,
people essentially did their own justice and crime control wasn’t put in the hands of this separate
group or institution.
• Penal/welfare nexus
o So with industrialization (prostitution, etc) they decided to get together a group of people (night
watchmen/police) to monitor the streets. This it was a response to the changing conditions. At this
time, there were many plans or schemes, and they were often created by the well of and had a moral
base. So there was a humanistic/moralistic undertone to the institutions and such. It was about saving
souls, helping the poor and destitute who were seen as unable to help themselves. So it is this
coming together of the social control system and the welfare system. So they realized that if you want
control, in some capacity you need to think about welfare. They were starting to think about social
problems, and also think about social problems in terms of their root problem.
• “Victorian Penalty: vs. “Modern Penalty
o Innes glosses over this in terms of the Victorian penalty vs the modern penalty. The Victorian
approach was clearly laid out with a hierarchy of punishments that got more serious the more serious
the offence got. In Modern, there is this shift. They started thinking about social problems and their
relationship to social control, and decided things needed to be done to help and fix people, and that
was to be how they would realize control. Thus, punishments or penalties became about correction.
The idea was that punishment can be a correction to something and draw people back in line. If you
contrast with the Victorian theme, it was tit for tat. You do something to me and I will do something
back. There is a bit of a change with the modern approach.
-Side Note: There’s been a backlash against penal welfarism as people think there needs to be more of a concern to look
after the victims with victim impact statements and other methods like victim and offender reconciliation.
Penal-Welfarism (This characterized the 1890’s to 1970’s)
• Rehabilitation- This is a hallmark of penal welfarism in terms of the idea of making offenders better and putting
programs in place to integrate offenders into society (counseling, parole, programs, etc).
• Discretion- This is the idea that judges should have a right to have a level of discretion at sentencing to take in
certain factors (past criminal history, etc). Also, there was the idea that you should be able to keep people in
prison for as long as it takes until they are rehabilitated.
• Expert Knowledge- Professionals are getting folded into this system and they now have their own vested
interests in how this plays out. They help perpetuate this approach because they want to be seen as legitimate
and such. So they use research they have done, etc. Other groups will all weigh in from all corners or expertise
factoring in for good and for bad.
• Modernism- There is a modernist undertone to penal welfare with an undertone of a belief in science and being
able to make the worl