NCJ Number
99878
Journal
Federal Probation Volume: 49 Issue: 2 Dated: (June 1985) Pages: 32-38
Date Published
1985
Length
7 pages
Annotation
Community service has gained the support of both liberals and conservatives by promising to achieve punishment, restitution, rehabilitation, and reintegration in equal measures, but whether or not community service fulfills these expectations is debatable.
Abstract
Liberals support community service because it promises to be a more humane and rehabilitative experience for the offender than imprisonment. Conservative support is due to its promise of reducing prison costs and being a more punitive alternative than probation or a fine. Community service meets these expectations in varying degrees. For community service to meet the demand for retribution or punishment, its punitive character should match the severity of the crimes of those sentenced to it. Apparently, however, judges cannot agree on what crimes warrant community service as the appropriate punishment. Community service as an instrument of restitution is also questionable, since it rarely involves direct service to the victim of the crime. There is no clear connection between the harm done by the crime and the community service rendered. Rehabilitative effects are questionable because there is no evidence that community service has been dramatically effective in reducing recidivism among its participants. Further, it may also be a means of widening the social net more than an instrument of reducing prison populations. Future assessments of the effectiveness of community service in achieving various corrections goals will determine the support it sustains. Twenty-nine references are listed.