THE ROLE OF CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS

THE ROLE OF CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS"Not only criminal behavior but also punishment is disruptive to community harmony" (Lord Croughton)
The rationale behind the use of correctional facilities is separation, specifically, physical separation of the offender from society. This separation rationale or containment doctrine (uncharitably called "warehousing" by critics and charitably called the protection of society and betterment of the offender by advocates) assumes that the conduct of certain crimes is so serious and the chance of repetition so great that the judge, acting for the good of society, must physically separate the offender from any motive or opportunity to harm the public again. Separation or containment is sometimes referred to as incapacitation, although the correct term is incarceration. The difference is that incapacitation aims at making it permanently impossible to re-offend, while incarceration aims at making it impossible only for a short while, with a hope that re-offending will not occur upon release. If you banish somebody from their homeland forever, or if you castrate a rapist, that is incapacitation. If you send somebody away for awhile, and pay careful attention to where you send them, for how long, and whether or not they improved, that is incarceration. Given these examples, a sentence of life without parole would be incapacitation, as would the death penalty, and as would most eye-for-eye retribution. Incarceration is an inseparable combination of deterrence and rehabilitation. Incarceration without paying much attention to the "where," "how long" and "whether improved" is simply called punishment or penalty, and in the sociology of punishment, involves the study of "why" penal sanctions exist, or in philosophy, the study of the "why" or rationale behind punishment. Incarceration with attention to the "where," "how long" and "whether improved" is called penology (short for the 19th Century phrase "penitentiary science") or the science of corrections (a 20th Century social engineering term for the ability to be technically proficient at the processing of incarcerated offenders). The difference is that penology mainly looks at what needs to go on inside a prison to keep it functioning, and correctional science mainly looks at the effectiveness and efficiency of the whole correctional apparatus or the correctional subsystem component of criminal justice.
The central purpose of a correctional subsystem in criminal justice is to carry out the criminal sentence imposed by the court subsystem (Clear & Cole 2000). In this purpose, a correctional subsystem assists with maintaining the integrity of the law and the ability of law to protect society. In a larger sense, the existence of a correctional apparatus helps society to enforce its behavioral norms, since the mere existence of a prison system reinforces the belief that there is a place where people can be put who exceed our tolerance for criminal behavior. In this sense, prisons serve to protect society, help define the limits of behavior, and help everyone know and understand what is permissible and what is not permissible. Almost all contemporary correctional systems claim the twin goals of public protection and fair punishment. Public protection (or public safety) is maintained by having a well-regulated set of procedures, facilities, and philosophies that are consistent with what court officials want and what society needs. Fair punishment is accomplished by applying some "corrective" yet still "punitive" action to convicted offenders that most often takes the form of humane security, custody, and control along a range of program opportunities all administered in a just and equitable manner within the least restrictive environment consistent with public safety.
FOUCAULT ON INCARCERATION & THE HISTORY OF WORKHOUSES
Incarceration, or the use of correctional facilities, arose in the history of Western civilization out of a distaste for transportation (the banishment of offender to far-away lands like Australia) and a distaste for corporal punishment (which was eventually banned). If Foucault's (1995) historical account can be believed, Western civilization moved away from a reliance on physical torture because torture no longer served the interests of maintaining sovereign power and the all-encompassing "carceral" state. Prisons are a "natural" phenomena in a global system of sovereign nation-states because the ultimate purpose is to either make all of society one big prison or to either cherish "liberty" to the point where "deprivation of liberty" becomes the punishment par excellence. At least that is the thesis of Discipline and Punish, admittedly a complex piece of philosophical work about corrections. Another subthesis is that societies progressively moved from torture of the body to torture of the mind, again a controversial point in Foucault's philosophy.
What most historians agree with in Foucault's version of history is the fact that as many European societies "transported" plague and leprosy victims to the colonies, the emptied hospitals and other facilities were converted to the confinement of new clientele -- the insane and the criminal. The significance of the many plagues that made up the worldwide "Black Death" which wiped out nearly 40% of the world's population from 1347-1352 (lasting up to 1429 in some parts of the world and up to the 19th Century in other parts) cannot be overestimated. If you remember the children's song "Ring Around the Rosies... We All Fall Down," then you are remembering a song about the Black Death years. What is more notable is that as people kept moving and migrating in a futile attempt to "flee" the Black Death, governments created WORKHOUSES, or prisons for the poor, which kept beggars, vagrants, pickpockets, and welfare cheats off the streets. The workhouses were officially created in 1834 by what were called "Poor laws" and workhouses came to exist in every county either as a direct descendant of the county jail or the model thereof. Workhouses existed for the "undeserving poor" as opposed to almshouses which existed for the "deserving poor." Workhouses became the model of prison discipline, set the stage for the expected behaviors of "masters" or correctional officers, and eventually deteriorated into orphanages, jails, and aged juvenile prisons. Almshouses became the model for social work institutions. Asylums for the mentally ill crossed both sides, with some becoming prisons and others becoming social work institutions.
TRANSPORTATION AND PENAL SERVITUDE
In earlier times, larger prisons certainly existed as holding pens (usually nothing more than underground dungeons) for far worse punishments (torture, spectacle, or being fed to the lions in the arena). However, as Kittrie, Zenoff & Eng (2002) argue, incarceration as the "ideal" punishment (second in severity to the death penalty) came into favor only after the practices of transportation and penal slavery (servitude) died out. Prior to 1850, most countries relied on transportation to send serious offenders to far-away colonies. After 1850 (and to some extent before), governments started experimenting with a variety of transportation known as PENAL SERVITUDE. Penal servitude involved being "sold into slavery" for a period of years either as a sailor in the Navy, at a galley port for the Navy, as a soldier in the Army, as a fighter in a mercenary force, as a worker for a businessman, or as a worker for a plantation owner. Penal servitude became quite popular in Spanish-speaking parts of the world, and some experts regard early modern Spain (circa 1688-1748) as the birthplace of the modern, above-ground prisons in the form of Spanish forts (presidios) and central prisons which handled the overflow of implacable prisoners assigned to penal servitude. All presidios had prisons, consisting of 8x10 foot stone cells with iron bars, and they were primarily used as part of Spanish conquest (along with missions and pueblos) for housing foreigners and Indians. The model of a prison "cell" widely in use today can be traced to the presidio cells. You can see from the following table why penal servitude became so popular because it was seen a more lenient than transportation.
Transportation
Penal Servitude
7 years or less
4 years or less
7-10 years
4-6 years
10-15 years
6-8 years
15 years or more
8-14 years
life
life
The relationship between slavery and corrections is a story that needs to be elaborated on. Unfortunately, there are few books on the subject that are "classics" such as Hughes (1987) work on transportation. There is also the matter of some controversy over the 13th Amendment, which reads as follows:
THE THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place to their jurisdiction.
This Amendment is usually interpreted to mean that slavery and peonage (forced servitude for owing debts) are abolished, but nothing prohibits compulsory work (for a private master in a jail) if a breach of contract or offensive behavior is "duly convicted" as a crime. Compulsory conscription into the armed services has been widely used by many states under this Amendment, but there are less than clear-cut cases of when the Amendment might apply, such as whether participating in an illegal union strike against an employer would qualify.
THE UNIQUELY AMERICAN TWIST ON CORRECTIONS
The United States imparted an unique religious twist to correctional institutions, and that twist consisted of the idea that prisons should be harsh, painful places, but not so harsh and painful that the offender cannot have the opportunity to reflect over what they did and mend their ways. This idea is a combination of Enlightenment humanitarianism and 19th century Utilitarianism. It is, at once, both idealistic and practical. Some of the basic principles to enact such an idea include the rule against "fraternization," impersonality of dress, regimented meals and counts, marching in mass movement lines, and an expectation that each inmate will "do their own time." Architecture and routine are designed to convey the impression that restraint is the primary purpose and treatment a casual afterthought. These features make up the basic PENITENTIARY model.
It wasn't long before Americans realized that adding more programs, farms, shops, classes, and recreation resulted in better control of prisoners and to some extent eased tensions within a penitentiary. Hence, the REFORMATORY movement was started, and newer prisons were built, some of which were called medium-security prisons with fences instead of walls, and minimum-security prisons without the need for armed guard towers. Special correctional facilities also sprouted up, for women, for youth, for reception and diagnosis, for prerelease purposes, for medical and psychiatric treatment, etc. A basic problem in such correctional facilities is the lack of funds to evaluate the effectiveness of programs. Corrections has a tendency to adopt new programs in a faddish, impulsive manner, and everything that passes for "new" has probably been tried somewhere, someplace before.
SO, WHAT ARE PRISONS FOR, ANYWAY?
Separation, obedience, and labor appear to be the "Holy Trinity" which guides the rationale for the whole of corrections (Kittrie, Zenoff & Eng 2002). Prisoners could be expected to be treated "differently" from other citizens (morally deranged or defective, perhaps), would obey all orders without question, and would work diligently at their assignments or reflection upon their misdeeds. Of these three, obedience without question appears to take precedence, and for this, correctional facilities adopted the quasi-military model of organization. Nothing else seems to produce a preserved isolation, unquestioning obedience, and regimented efficiency better than a military model. Above all, prisons are supposed to be places of order, a shining example that the outside world can look into and see what good things happen when the right principles of organization are put into place. Unfortunately, we often don't think of prisons that way today. Perhaps it's the MILITARY MODEL. Some reformers have thought so, and suggested a replacement FACTORY MODEL. However, most prison administrators are uncomfortable with suggestions for change at this basic a level.
Fox (1972) has described corrections as having multiple and conflicting goals. From time to time, we hear debates over what is the "primary" goal of corrections -- to contain, to control, to punish, to restrain, to rehabilitate, to reintegrate, etc. Yet, one primary task remains essential -- prisons exist to retain CONTROL as a basic part of their organizational purpose, and control extends to any opportunities for treatment and betterment. The roots of this primacy run deep, as does public resentment, fear, and fashionableness which seem to drive a need to forget about prisons and deprecate those inside of them. To study corrections is nothing less than the study of factors that interconnect the psyche of mankind with the will to overcome inertia in society. Evading the study of prisons or failing to recognize their important place in society is something we cannot afford to do.
INTERNET RESOURCESGardens of the Law: The Role of Prisons in Capitalist SocietyHistory of the WorkhousesJurisprudence of the 13th Amendment's Slavery & Involuntary Servitude Clause (pdf)Penal Servitude in Early Modern SpainReentry & Reintegration - What is Corrections' Role? (pdf)What Role Can the Private Sector Play in Corrections?Wikipedia Encyclopedia Article on What a Prison is
PRINTED RESOURCESClear, T. & Cole, G. (2000). American Corrections, 5e. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.del Carmen, A. (2004). Corrections, 2e. Cincinnati: Atomic Dog.Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. NY: Vintage Books.Fox, V. (1972). Introduction to Corrections. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Garland, D. (1990). Punishment and Modern Society. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Hirsch, A. (1992). The Rise of the Penitentiary: Prisons and Punishment in Early America. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.Hughes, R. (1987). The Fatal Shore: A History of the Transportation of Convicts to Australia, 1787-1868. NY: Collins.Kittrie, N., Zenoff, E., & Eng, V. (2002). Sentencing, Sanctions, and Corrections. NY: Foundation Press.Reichel, P. (2001). Corrections: Philosophies, Practices, and Procedures, 2e. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Schmalleger, F. & Smykla, J. (2005). Corrections in the 21st Century. Boston: McGraw Hill.Silverman I. & Vega, M. (2000). Corrections: A Comprehensive View. Minneapolis: West. Tewksbury, R. (1997). Introduction to Corrections. Boston: McGraw Hill.
Last Updated: 08/26/04Syllabus for JUS 294MegaLinks in Criminal Justice