Lecture 6.doc

10 views5 pages
1 Jun 2013
School
Course

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Test
-don't have to argue that a sociological approach is better than moral philosophical
-can decide which perspective u wanna use to argue your points
-if u are not going to argue a certain position (socio or moral phl) argue WHY it’s not
relevant to the certain topic -- discuss it
-give a direct answer to the question in the introduction
-develop your own arguments which draws upon the theories -- original -- from
readings and lectures use supporting evidence -- but make sure you have your own
twist and critique
-OFFICE HOURS -- Thursday --- 1-3pm
Recap:
Retribution:
-Soc of ineq: setting up a theory of punishment based on proportionality disguises its
real nature -- which has specific people with specific interests
-left ret: rehabilitation is dangerous -- it’s a mask for doing more extensive and
damaging things
-Durkheim:
-Focault: transition from brutal sovereign power to intensive mode of discipline ---
retribution involves less state power -- less coercive power -- for that reason his
analyses are influential on left ret. ideas
Deterrence:
-Durkheim -- has nothing to do with anything -- purpose of punishment is not to deter
people -- it’s to celebrate the moral order and ritual --- it is missing the point --
-Focault: rational government -- superficial mode of discipline -- harnessing people's
rationality
Denunciation:
-Soc of inequality: challenge the idea that the system is fair -- moral messages sent out
by punishment system are there to be challenged
-Durkheim: the actual moral content of the message is trivial --- we are inferior to the
social/collective and it cannot be defeated by deviance and law breaking
-Focault: punishment, ideas and theories of it send messages about expert technical
rehabilitative government -- not distributed to the public through wide channels -- but
it’s really spread by the spread of ideas which starts in the CJS into other areas of life --
psychotherapy, industrial psychology etc -- grow an entire society based around the
idea of intense psychological discipline
Rehabilitation and Clinical Treatment
-if the goal is to heal people, then why does it have to be in prison (punishment) and
not in other healthcare places?
-earlier in time, it was the confinement which was meant to be unpleasant --- the key
point of reform -- had to be suffering to gain spiritual insight
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 5 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
-but now, there is no reason it has to be unpleasant
-do rehabilitation have the effect of changing people so that they become less prone to
committing crimes?
-what is the relationship between treatment programs delivered as part of punishment
and other non-punitive treatments?
-How do sociologies of punishment address rehabilitation?
-70s: suspicion about whether rehabilitation works -- Martinson: What Works? Nothing
Works? (emo child)
-no diff between recidivism rates of ppl who have been in prison and had rehab
programming and those who had not and had rehab programming
-in the history of rehab programming, when a new kind of programming comes
in, the early reports of it tend to suggest that it is successful --- BECAUSE (one
reason) when you first introduce a program, they are first delivered by very
qualified people -- what happens 10 years down the road when it is being
administered by untrained people who dgaf
-the consensus is = under certain circumstances, it is successful in producing
statistically sig. reduction in recidivism rates -- but not as good as we want --
but is it worth doing? to achieve relatively moderate effects? YES (bc of the cost of
crime and CJS in the long run)
-whatever techniques used were ones that were popular at the time -- child
trauma hypnosis, group psychotherapy etc --- general consensus is that it
doesnt work and is counterproductive (can work to traumatize even more)
-cognitive behavioral programming became more popular -- influence people’s
cognitions -- very targeted -- based on the idea that the person has
psychological inadequacies and skills which need to be addressed (i.e. chemical
dependency -- drug crimes) (vs. not addressing deep psychological reason as to
why they developed the addiction, not getting into people’s
childhoods/backgrounds etc)
-have to tailor programs to specific needs
-Canadian researchers were at the forefront of implementing rehab
programming (some but not all)
-the disenchantment with rehabilitation came about bc of the whole idea that
you were giving people excuses --- political argument -- rehabilitation was
mollycoddling people
-conservative critics: suggested that it was over intensive (rehab does not provide
a limit on punishment) and something invasive and authoritarian about therapy
-- “you’re sick, I’m not, I know what’s wrong with you, I can fix you”
-Kathleen article: cannot do therapy in prison without doing something else -- within
the coercive env of the prison
-it becomes a mode of evaluating individuals, it’s coerced -- not a therapeutic process
-concludes that we should abandon it
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 5 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Get access

Grade+
$10 USD/m
Billed $120 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
40 Verified Answers
Study Guides
1 Booster Class
Class+
$8 USD/m
Billed $96 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
30 Verified Answers
Study Guides
1 Booster Class