Imprisonment and Its Alternatives

• NCJ Number: 83326
• Journal: Australian Law Journal Volume: 55 Issue: 3 Dated: (March 1981) Pages: 126-134
• Author(s): D Biles
• Date Published: 1981
• Length: 9 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: Australia
• Note: Adapted from a paper presented to the Annual Conference of Australian Supreme Court Judges, Melbourne, 29th January, 1980.

Annotation

This paper describes the use of imprisonment in contemporary Australia and then assesses the impact of several alternatives to institutionalization on prison population size.

Abstract

Although a larger portion of aboriginals in the population appears correlated with high prison population, this factor does not totally explain significant differences in imprisonment rates among Australian states and territories. Studies have shown that jurisdictions with high imprisonment rates do not have lower crime rates, but statistics suggest that Australia is making greater use of its prisons. Several critics believe that Australia must reduce its imprisonment rate to save costs and reduce the harmful effects of prison on nondangerous offenders. The major alternatives to imprisonment available to the judiciary are probation, suspended sentence, work orders, community service, attendance centers, periodic detention, and fines. However, 1979 probation and parole data do not support the expected finding that high use of these options is associated with lower use of prisons. Other court-based alternatives have been used by an extremely small number of participants, while the numbers of offenders for whom imprisonment is reduced by administrative decision is even smaller. Remission systems do decrease prison populations, but they cannot be considered alternatives to incarceration. Approximately 0.1 percent of Australian prisoners serve their sentences in work release programs, but this method should be encouraged because it eases transition to the normal community. Since alternatives to imprisonment apparently do not reduce prison populations, officials must consider whether these programs actually increase the numbers of individuals who are punished by the state. Finally, no research has proved that alternatives are more effective in reducing recidivism than traditional imprisonment. The article contains 43 footnotes.