R v R: the age-old debate between rehabilitation and retribution
Nicholas Ruff examines the purposes of punishment, and how these purposes are reflected in our contemporary criminal justice system.
The age-old debate has been reignited: rehabilitation or retribution — which works to decrease crime in society? The short answer: both. The long answer depends on what sort of decrease society desires.
The criminal justice system is erected upon four pillars, firstly to deter the offender and any prospective offenders from committing like offences. Secondly, punish the offender for the crime (retribution). Thirdly, incapacitate the offender from committing further crimes. Lastly, rehabilitate the offender in order for the offender to be able to be reintegrated into society.
Recent political stances powered by the media have promoted a shift towards a more ‘tough on crime’ mentality, pushing through tougher bail conditions, minimum mandatory sentencing, continued detention and the like. Although such reforms inevitability lead to an initial decrease in crime rates, rates of recidivism still remained relatively high over the last five years. Of the prison population released in 2013, 40 per cent have returned to prison, while 46 per cent have returned to corrective services.
Prison population rates continue to exponentially increase across both the developed and developing world, costing Australia alone $2.6 billion per year. The average prisoner costs $292 per day — which is more than the average earning of an Australian. Australia continues to deplete the rehabilitative services offered to prisoners in order to keep up with the cost of the ever expanding prison system.
Increasing prison populations is obviously not sustainable in the long term as Australia’s population is expected to skyrocket in the next 50 years. Moreover, studies have found that prisoners exposed to prison-like environments leads to an increase in criminal behaviour. The Stanford Prison Experiment showcased that psychologically healthy individuals could become sadistic or depressed when placed in a prison-like environment. This is exacerbated when accounting for other factors such as solitary confinement, substance abuse, physical and sexual violence, and racial segregation. Another theory exists that suggests that prisoners that are forced to ‘mingle’ with other prisoners will consciously or sub-consciously learn the ‘tricks of the trade’ and may become more proficient in their chosen criminal field or increase the severity of criminal acts.
Prisons quite often reflect society’s most disadvantaged groups, and continuing or increasing incarceration will not resolve the underlying issues that these individuals face. A variety of factors exist which attempt to explain why offenders commit crime such as mental health issues, social and economic conditions, substance abuse, as well as geographical and political factors. In addition, there are several theories that suggests that some offenders are ‘born’ with the criminal instinct. These factors are for the most part avoidable or at the very least have the capability to be minimised.
The aim of rehabilitative and preventative programs is to attack these factors rather than attacking the offender. These programs attempt to enable offenders with the tools needed to be able to reintegrate into society. A Queensland study found that when prisons participated in a VET education program their recidivism rate decreased to 23 per cent. On a national level, Sweden has begun to focus on rehabilitation, and as a result has been able to decrease their prison population by 21%, while decreasing rates of re-offending by about half when compared with the UK and most European nations.
So the next time we consider how to get tough on crime, consider decreasing expenditure on the prison system and increasing budgets for rehabilitative or preventative programs to target the factors that influence criminal behaviour.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Australian Government, Australian crime: Facts & Figures (25 February 2016) Australian Institute of Criminology <http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/facts/1-20/2014.html>
Australian Government, Reducing recidivism through vocational education and training programs (25 June 2009) Australian Institute of Criminology <http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/crm/61-80/crm065.html>
Benson, Etienne, ‘Rehabilitate or punish?’ (2003) 23(7) American Psychological Association, 46
De Luca, HR et al, ‘Punishment vs. Rehabilitation: A Proposal for Revising Sentencing Practices’ (1991) 55 Fed. Probation 37
James, Erwin, ‘Prison is not punishment in Sweden. We get people into better shape’, The Guardian (online), 26 November 2014
Thomas, Jason, ‘How much does it cost to keep people in Australian jails?’, SBS (online), 2 February 2015
