SHOCK OF IMPRISONMENT - COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SHORT-TERM INCARCERATION AS A TREATMENT TECHNIQUE

• NCJ Number: 12114
• Journal: CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY AND CORRECTIONS Volume: 15 Issue: 3 Dated: (JULY 1973) Pages: 281-291
• Author(s): P C FRIDAY; D M PETERSON
• Date Published: 1973
• Length: 11 pages
• Corporate Author: Canadian Criminal Justice Assoc
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: Canada

Annotation

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE SPLIT SENTENCE - AN ALTERNATIVE COMBINING BRIEF INCARCERATION WITH PROBATION.

Abstract

FOLLOWING A DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPE, THE AUTHORS PRESENT CONTRASTING VIEWPOINTS ON THE MIXED SENTENCE. ARGUMENTS FOR INCARCERATION PRIOR TO PROBATION RANGE FROM THE REASSESSMENT OF INMATE NEEDS, TO THE PROVISION OF GREATER CONTROL OVER INDIVIDUALS BY AUTHORITIES. THE DOMINANT VIEW IN THE U.S. IS THAT SHORT-TERM IMPRISONMENT SERVES TO SHOCK THE INDIVIDUAL INTO A REALIZATION OF THE REALITIES OF PRISON LIFE THROUGH THE EXPERIENCE OF IMPRISONMENT. CONTESTANTS ARGUE THAT PRISON AND PROBATION ARE DICHOTOMIES AND CANNOT BE MIXED, AND THAT INCARCERATION CONTAMINATES THE PERSON AND ANY CHANCE OF REHABILITATION. PREVIOUS RESEARCH TENDS TO FAVOR THE IMPACT OF SHORT PERIODS OF INCARCERATION UNDER SPECIALIZED CONDITIONS. HOWEVER, NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE EXISTS TO SUPPORT OR REJECT THE THEORY. THE OHIO SHOCK PROBATION EXPERIMENT INDICATES THAT ONLY 9.8 PERCENT OF THOSE RELEASED WITH MIXED SENTENCES WERE REINSTITUTIONALIZED. THERE ARE SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH.