CONTACT US: Contact info
|
Citation |
Pratt J. Behav. Sci. Law 2000; 18(2-3): 135-151. |
|
Copyright |
(Copyright © 2000, John Wiley and Sons) |
|
DOI |
10.1002/1099-0798(200003/06)18:2/3<135::AID-BSL392>3.0.CO;2-Q |
PMID |
unavailable |
|
Abstract |
In the last few years, new ways of punishing sex offenders have been introduced in many modern societies. However, these sanctions have a broader significance than this: they are part of a broader set of penal arrangements - directed at the criminal population as a whole - which represents a new punitiveness. This seems to be moving the direction of legal punishment beyond the established parameters that had hitherto been set for it in modern society. This had involved punishment becoming increasingly administered by penal bureaucracies, to the exclusion of the general public, being influenced by the opinion of penal experts, and becoming more tempered, consistent and purposeful in form. Sanctions that did not fit these criteria faded out of modern penality. The indeterminate prison sentence was introduced at its outer limits as a residual measure of control to be used against those offenders - frequently sex criminals - for whom the existing penal framework was thought inappropriate. Even so, by the 1970s, these special penal measures were falling into disuse. However, the new punitiveness has not only given new life to them, but has also led to the introduction of measures which seem to reverse or move beyond modernpenal parameters. The article argues that the reasons for these shifts lie in the profound economic and social changes that have taken place in Western societies over the course of the last two decades or so. (Abstract Adapted from Source: Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 2000. Copyright © 2000 by John Wiley and Sons) |