Punishment in the society
Punishment in the society; Societies frequently utilize punishment as a deterrent to people from acting in ways that are regarded as inappropriate or damaging to others. Punishment can come in a variety of shapes, including physical punishment, community service, fines, and incarceration.
Deterring people from committing crimes or other wrongdoings is the main goal of punishment. By excluding people from society for a while, it is also considered a measure to safeguard society from dangerous or harmful persons.
Yet, many individuals contend that punishment is ineffective in attaining its objectives and that it can have detrimental effects on the penalized person as well as society at large. Some contend that the severity of the punishment is excessive or out of proportion to the offense committed, which encourages further criminal activity.
In addition, some criticize the criminal justice system, claiming that it unfairly targets particular demographics, such as persons of color, the underprivileged, or those suffering from mental illness. Some contend that rather than merely punishing people for their misdeeds, punishment should emphasize rehabilitation and deal with the root causes of criminal conduct.
Generally, punishment is a necessary component of society, but there is constant discussion over its appropriateness and efficiency, and there is also ongoing study into how to design a more efficient and equitable criminal justice system.
By the end of the unit, students will be able to:
- Evaluate justifications for punishment and the challenge posed by abolitionist critiques.
- Synthesise and critique a range of theoretical perspectives which explain the nature of punishment and how punishment in societies has evolved.
- Understand different types of punishment used in contemporary society and their impact on particular groups.
- Reflect on how punishment is shaped by political economy.
- Write a well-argued, clear, and accurate document.
Type of Assessment: Essay
Students should write a 2000-word essay answering one of the following questions:
Drawing on Sim’s article (2016) on prisons’ budget cuts during austerity, critically discuss the following quote: “The current [prison] crisis has been relentlessly tied to the budget cuts. While the cuts have intensified the crisis, they are not its cause”.
Contrary to popular assumption, the budget cutbacks are not the only reason of the jail crisis, according to Sim’s (2016) paper on prison budget reduction during the austerity period. According to the report, a wider range of problems, including overcrowding, a shortage of staff, and a lack of supplies and assistance for convicts, are to blame for the situation. While there is little doubt that the cuts have made the problem worse, they are hardly the only reason for it.
The various elements that lead to the jail crisis are the subject of significant concerns raised by this argument. Budget cuts have undoubtedly contributed to the crisis, but there are also more fundamental problems at hand, such as the overuse of imprisonment as a solution to social problems, the lack of access to social services and mental health care, and the overrepresentation of marginalized groups in prisons.
See the budget cuts as an escalation of current issues to understand how they relate to the jail dilemma. For instance, personnel reductions brought on by budget cuts may raise the likelihood of violence, self-harm, and suicide among convicts. Similarly to this, reducing funding for educational and vocational programs might limit the chances for inmates to pick up knowledge and skills that will aid their reintegration into society after release.
It is crucial to remember that the impact on inmates is only one aspect of the funding cuts to prisons. Important problems concerning social values, public administration, and the place of the state in society are also raised by this. For instance, some contend that the jail crisis is a sign of a larger political and economic structure that favors punitive solutions to social issues over more comprehensive and preventative ones. Some contend that the problem of budget cuts for prisons is a symptom of a greater trend toward austerity and the demise of the welfare state.
Conclusion: Although it is true that budget cuts have made the jail situation worse, Sim’s case that the crisis is not exclusively attributable to the cuts is a strong one. Given the complexity of the jail situation, it calls for a sophisticated, comprehensive response that takes into account not only the budget cuts but also the larger social and political causes that have contributed to the crisis.
How do race and/or gender affect the ‘pains of imprisonment’?
Significant determinants of the experience of the “pains of imprisonment” include race and gender. The psychological, social, and bodily suffering that prisoners go through as a result of being imprisoned is referred to as the “pains of captivity.”
According to research, each prisoner’s experience is different, and those from oppressed groups—such as women and people of color—often encounter discrimination and special difficulties.
In terms of race, research consistently demonstrates that inmates of color are overrepresented. This overrepresentation is frequently linked to structural problems including racial profiling, unequal sentencing, and a lack of access to competent legal counsel. People of race may consequently endure additional “pains of imprisonment” like prejudice, teasing, and violence from other inmates and staff members, as well as restricted access to amenities like healthcare.
Women’s prison experiences can vary greatly from men’s in terms of gender. Women frequently experience additional difficulties like sexual harassment, abuse, and exploitation from both staff and other inmates. Furthermore, women frequently have particular health requirements, such as menstrual care and access to pregnancy and postnatal care, which may not be appropriately met in prison environments. While inside bars, women may struggle to maintain relationships with their families and children, which can negatively affect their mental health and general well-being.
Ultimately, not everyone feels the “pains of imprisonment,” so it is important to understand how race and gender interact with other variables like class, sexual orientation, and ability to influence prisoners’ experiences. To guarantee that all inmates are treated humanely and that their rights and dignity are maintained, it is crucial to address these particular difficulties.
What is ‘penal populism’ and how has it influenced punishment in England and Wales over the last 30 years?
The term “penal populism” refers to a political and social environment in which public concern about crime is addressed by politicians and the media by promoting punitive and populist solutions. These initiatives frequently emphasize “tough on crime” rhetoric, stricter sentencing guidelines, and a greater reliance on incarceration as a form of punishment.
Throughout the past 30 years, punitive populism has had a considerable impact on punishment in England and Wales. The political conversation and media coverage both reflected a major rise in popular concern about crime during the 1980s and 1990s. This resulted in a political shift in favor of punishing legislation and practices, including three-strikes statutes, mandatory minimum sentences, and more incarceration.
The passage of the Criminal Justice Act of 1991, which instituted mandatory minimum sentences for some felonies and removed parole for certain dangerous criminals, is one of the most notable examples of this trend. The act, which was established in response to public concern about crime, drew strong criticism from the legal community for its rigidity.
Political parties continued to support harsher sentencing guidelines and greater incarceration practices in the twenty-first century, demonstrating the prevalence of penal populism. With an increasing understanding that punitive policies may not be effective in decreasing crime and may have adverse effects on society as a whole, there has been a shift in recent years toward a more evidence-based approach to criminal justice policy.
Despite this change, criminal populism still has an impact in England and Wales. The media frequently has a big impact on how the general public feels about crime and punishment, and there is still a strong political and public desire for draconian sentencing laws. As a result, it is necessary to keep analyzing how penal populism affects punishment and to move toward evidence-based policies that put an emphasis on rehabilitation and lowering reoffending.
Choose ONE of the theoretical perspectives on the punishment we have studied: Durkheimian, Marxist, Foucauldian, or feminist. Critically evaluate the Prison Industrial Complex using your chosen theory.
The term “penal populism” refers to a political and social environment in which public concern about crime is addressed by politicians and the media by promoting punitive and populist solutions. These initiatives frequently emphasize “tough on crime” rhetoric, stricter sentencing guidelines, and a greater reliance on incarceration as a form of punishment.
Throughout the past 30 years, punitive populism has had a considerable impact on punishment in England and Wales. The political conversation and media coverage both reflected a major rise in popular concern about crime during the 1980s and 1990s. This resulted in a political shift in favor of punishing legislation and practices, including three-strikes statutes, mandatory minimum sentences, and more incarceration.
The passage of the Criminal Justice Act of 1991, which instituted mandatory minimum sentences for some felonies and removed parole for certain dangerous criminals, is one of the most notable examples of this trend. The act, which was established in response to public concern about crime, drew strong criticism from the legal community for its rigidity.
Political parties continued to support harsher sentencing guidelines and greater incarceration practices in the twenty-first century, demonstrating the influence of penal populism. With an increasing understanding that punitive policies may not be effective in decreasing crime and may have adverse effects on society as a whole, there has been a shift in recent years toward a more evidence-based approach to criminal justice policy.
Despite this change, criminal populism still has an impact in England and Wales. The media frequently has a big impact on how the general public feels about crime and punishment, and there is still a strong political and public desire for draconian sentencing laws. As a result, it is necessary to keep analyzing how penal populism affects punishment and to move toward evidence-based policies that put an emphasis on rehabilitation and lowering reoffending.
Elijah Wachira
Choose ONE of the following theories on punishment: feminist, Marxist, Durkheimian, or Foucauldian. Use your selected theory to assess the Prison Industrial Complex critically.
To assess the Prison Industrial Complex critically, I’ll use the Marxist theory of punishment (PIC).
According to Marxist theory, the employment of punishment by the governing class is a means of retaining its hold over the working class. Marxist theory holds that the capitalist system is based on the exploitation of the working class by the ruling class and that one way the ruling class upholds its domination is through the criminal justice system. In this perspective, punishment serves two purposes: first, to curb crime, and second, to control the working class.
The phrase “prison industrial complex” (PIC) refers to the confluence of public and private interests in the prison business, including the building and operation of jails and prisons, the provision of services to inmates, and the exploitation of inmate labor. Marxists view the PIC as an example of the capitalist system, where the prison industry is a successful business that serves the interests of the ruling class.
Several parts of the PIC are in line with Marxist philosophy. First off, the prison sector is a wealthy company with rich economic prospects coming from government contracts and private investments in the building and maintenance of prisons. When private companies provide services to inmates at a lower cost and frequently lesser quality than governmental suppliers, it can lead to the exploitation of prisoners.
Second, another element of the PIC that is in line with Marxist philosophy is the employment of jail labor. Prisoners are frequently employed as inexpensive labor by private firms, earning meager earnings in the process. The ruling class benefits from this practice since it lowers labor expenses and gives them a way to make money.
Finally, Marxist theory is also consistent with the racial and economic inequities in the criminal justice system. The criminal justice system is a mechanism used to uphold social control and reinforce the domination of the ruling class, and those of color and those from low-income neighborhoods are disproportionately represented in the jail population.
Marxists view the PIC as an example of the capitalist system, in which the criminal justice system is a means for retaining power and dominance over the working class. The criminal justice system’s racial and economic imbalances, the financial motive, and the exploitation of prison labor all contribute to the ruling class’s continued domination. It is essential to oppose the PIC’s underlying capitalist system and work toward a more just and equitable society in order to address these problems.
References
- Garland, D. (2001). The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. University of Chicago Press.
- Simon, J. (2016). The neoliberal transformation of the American prison system. Punishment & Society, 18(4), 416-442.
- Davis, A. (2003). Are prisons obsolete?. Open Media.
- Clear, T. R. (2007). Imprisoning communities: How mass incarceration makes disadvantaged neighborhoods worse. Oxford University Press.
- Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Vintage Books.
- Carlen, P. (2002). Women’s imprisonment: A study in social control. Routledge.
- Wacquant, L. (2009). Punishing the Poor: The Neoliberal Government of Social Insecurity. Duke University Press.
