Suchergebnisse

The article examines the issue of women's unnatural post-prison deaths in Victoria, Australia, through the lens of women's accounts of survival and near-death after exit from prison. Central to this analysis is the seldom addressed or acknowledged relationship between trauma and the multiple harms and disadvantages that women experience both in the prison system and on the outside. In seeking to explicate the centrality oftrauma to women's experiences inside and outside the system, we draw upon the accounts of the women with whom we have spoken in the course of this research. A key theme that emerges from these narratives is the prevalence of trauma, near-death experiences and harms faced by women who have survived. Such accounts run counter to assumptions within existing post-release research that imprisonment comprises a discrete traumatic episode within a woman's life and that there is a useful distinction to be made between women who are strong enough to survive and those who die. In this way we offer a contribution towards revising possible future directions for critical feminist and prison scholars.

List of Tables and Figures -- List of Abbreviations -- Ch. 1: Introduction -- PART 1: PUNISHMENT AND PRISON -- Ch. 2: The Prison Emerges -- Ch. 3: Justifying Imprisonment as Punishment -- Ch. 4: Who is Punished? -- PART II: UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF THE PRISON -- Ch. 5: Life, Culture and Adaption in Prison -- Ch. 6: The Gendered Nature of Imprisonment -- Ch. 7: Prisoners and Protest -- Ch. 8: Prison in Popular Culture -- PART 111: THE PENAL FRAMEWORK -- Ch. 9: Prisoners' Rights -- Ch. 10: Governing Prisons -- Ch. 11: Working in Prison -- Ch. 12: The Architecture of Incarceration -- PART IV: POLITICS AND PENALITY -- Ch. 13: Comparative Penology -- Ch. 14: The Future of the Prison -- PART V: RESEARCHING PRISONS AND IMPRISONMENT -- Ch. 15: Researching Prisons and Imprisonment -- Glossary -- Index.

Based on a large, comparative study of prisoner experiences in England & Wales and Norway, this article explores the concept of the 'depth of imprisonment' – put most simply, the degree of control, isolation and difference from the outside world – in two stages. First, it sets out the various factors that contribute to 'depth' i.e. its core components. Second, it outlines the most frequent metaphors used to communicate depth, highlighting the ways in which these metaphors bring into focus a range of ways in which the basic fact of imprisonment – the deprivation of liberty, and the removal of the individual from the community – is experienced. In doing so, the article also makes a case for the adoption of conceptual metaphors as a means of describing prison systems and regimes, and thereby attending to the ways in which prisoners experience some of the most fundamental elements of incarceration.

Examines effect of eight factors on state incarceration rates; based on 1984 data. Crime, economics, social characteristics, demographics, ideology and culture, sentencing and parole reforms, alternatives to corrections, and institutional conditions.

Gan brīvības atņemšana, gan apcietinājums paredz ieslodzītas personas pārvietošanas un tiesību ierobežojumus. Dotajā darbā apskatīta tieši brīvības atņemšana, ar kuru jāsaprot soda izciešanu priekš jau notiesātajām personām. Turpat darbā dažkārt, tiks salīdzināts apcietinājums, kā drošības līdzeklis un brīvības atņemšana, kā soda veids. Darba mērķis ir brīvības atņemšanas izpildes izpēte. Dotajā darbā autors mēģina novērtēt brīvības atņemšanas, ka vienu no stingrākajiem soda veidiem, sociāli ¬– tiesisko dabu, izpildes mehānismu un mērķus. Darba izstrādāšanas gaitā tika vērtēti tādi jēdzieni un kategorijas, kuri atspoguļo brīvības atņemšanas būtību un izpildi. Tika sniegti priekšlikumi par brīvībās atņemšanas izpildi, Kriminālsodu izpildes normatīvo aktu pilnveidošanu, brīvības atņemšanas vietu efektivitātes palielināšanu. Apskatīti notiesāto tiesiskā statusa izpratnes problēmas un brīvības atņemšanas iestāžu darbinieku statuss un loma brīvības atņemšanas izpildē, Resocializācijas jēdziena izpratne un veidi, kā arī problēmas. Brīvības atņemšana tiks analizēta kā kriminālsods un kriminālsoda realizācijas veids. Brīvības atņemšanu piedāvāts aplūkot no sekojošiem aspektiem: tieslietu uzdevuma, sociālas politikas attiecībā pret notiesātajiem, starptautisko tiesību prasību attiecībā pret notiesātajiem. Tiek analizēta galvenā brīvības atņemšanas pazīme – izolācija (no sabiedrības). Šaurāka nozīmē izolācija paredz materiāli tehniskos līdzekļu kopumu un organizatoriskos pasākumus, lai noturēt notiesāto zem uzraudzības konkrētajā brīvības atņemšanas vietā ar noteikto uzturēšanas režīmu. Plašākā nozīmē izolāciju saprot ar noteikto sociāli tiesisko un organizatorisko pasākumu kopumu, kas palīdz uzturēt notiesātos attiecīgajos sadzīves apstākļos, kas sekmē notiesāto resocializāciju. ; Currently the work deals directly with custody, which should be understood as sentence for already convicted persons. Both imprisonment and detention for detained persons movement restrictions. At work sometimes, will be compared to detention as a security measure and imprisonment as punishment. The aim is to research the execution of custodial. Currently the author of the work tries to evaluate the detention as that one of the toughest punishment, socially the legal nature of the enforcement mechanisms and targets. While developing the work where evaluated the concepts and the category that reflects the nature of imprisonment and execution. Proposals were made for the execution of imprisonment, criminal enforcement of regulatory enactments, in places of detention for increasing efficiency. Researched convicted of the legal status of understanding the problem and penitentiary staff status and role of prison performance, concept of resocialization and types, as well as problems. Deprivation of liberty will be dealt with as a criminal and criminal form of marketing. Deprivation of liberty offered to consider the following aspects: the task of justice, social policy against the prisoners the international legal action against the convicts. Analyzes the main feature of prison – insulation (the company). Narrower meaning of insulation materials for a set of technical and organizational measures, to keep prisoners under surveillance a particular place of detention to the maintenance mode. More generally, isolated is meant by the socio – legal and organizational measures to help keep convicts in the relevant domestic conditions that contribute to prisoners re–education and resocialization.

Guidelines sentencing data from Pennsylvania for the years 1985–1987 are analyzed to assess the influence of gender on judges' imprisonment decisions. These data provide detailed information on offense severity and prior record, permit statistical controls for other variables thought to affect imprisonment decisions, cover a fairly comprehensive list of common‐law offenses (with adequate sample size), and contain judges' dispositional‐departure reasons for sentences outside the guidelines schema. The data—analyzed with additive and interactive models–indicate that gender (net of other factors) has a small effect on the likelihood of imprisonment toward lesser jailing of female defendants but has a negligible effect on the length‐of‐imprisonment decision. Observations and interview responses from selected judges help to clarify the ways in which judges' sentencing practices are gender linked. Together, the statistical and the qualitative data suggest that the sentencing practices of judges are driven by two main concerns, blameworthiness (e.g., as indicated by prior record, type of involvement, remorse) and practicality (e.g., as indicated by child‐care responsibility, pregnancy, emotional or physical problems, availability of adequate jail space). Based on our findings, we suspect that when men and women appear in (contemporary) criminal court in similar circumstances and are charged with similar offenses, they receive similar treatment. A major question from a policy perspective is, when gender disparities in sentence outcomes do arise, are the disparities warranted or unwarranted?

This book brings together a group of leading authorities in this field, both academics and practitioners, to address the complex issues that the increasing number of prisoners in the UK, USA and elsewhere has raised. It assess the implications and results of research in this field, and suggests ways of mitigating the often devastating personal and psychological consequences of imprisonment

Abstract
In this article, I try to show how the principle of fair play provides insight into the problem of excessive incarceration. I also address the concern that democratic societies are especially susceptible to this problem because of their tendency to foster what has come to be called penal populism. My argument is that democracy leads to mass imprisonment only when an otherwise democratic polity neglects what Albert Dzur calls the "moral dimension" of government by the people. In particular, this moral dimension requires an understanding of the polity as a cooperative enterprise according to rules that specify the terms of fair play. Mass incarceration of the kind that now characterizes the United States is a sign that this polity is failing to play fair when it imprisons many of those who violate its laws.

This chapter rests on two assumptions, at least one of which is controversial. The first is that something is wrong when a society imprisons as many people as the United States now does. According to a widely published columnist, George Will, the rate of imprisonment was about 100 per 100,000 Americans until the 1970s. Since then the rate has shot up, to the point where "700 per 100,000" are now in prison; "America," Will reported in 2013, "has nearly 5 percent of the world's population but almost 25 percent of its prisoners." It is possible, of course, that these figures are just where they ought to be, or even too low. When a professed conservative such as Will takes them to be alarming, however, there seems little need to defend the assumption that something is amiss. The second assumption is that the principle of fair play underpins the justification of legal punishment. This assumption is clearly controversial, for only a few scholars nowadays justify punishment in terms of fair play. For present purposes, however, I shall simply point to the defenses I have offered elsewhere and respond to criticisms of the fair-play approach only in passing. In effect, I shall be presenting an oblique defense of this approach by demonstrating how it provides a helpful way of addressing the problem of excessive incarceration. In doing so, I shall also address the concern that democratic societies are especially prone to this problem because of their tendency to foster what has come to be known as penal populism. My argument is that democracy leads to mass imprisonment only when an otherwise democratic polity neglects what Albert Dzur calls the "moral dimension" of democracy: "Because citizens are lawgivers as well as law abiders, they have a special obligation in a republic to be vigilant to the possibility that their laws are unfairly burdening some over others, that their laws are exclusionary or discriminatory." Dzur makes no explicit reference to the principle of fair play here or elsewhere in his book, but I hope to show that the vigilance he calls for requires attention to that principle.

Introduction / Dirk van Zyl Smit, Catherine Appleton and Georgie Benford -- The impact of life imprisonment on criminal justice reform in the United States / Marc Mauer and Ashley Nellis -- Life imprisonment in Latin America / Beatriz López Lorca -- Life without parole in Australia : current practices, juveniles and retrospective sentencing / Kate Fitz-Gibbon -- Life imprisonment and human rights in Uganda / Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi -- A new form of life imprisonment for India? / Madhurima Dhanuka -- An administrative procedure for life prisoners : law and practice of royal pardon in the Netherlands / Wiene van Hattum and Sonja Meijer -- Constitutionalizing life imprisonment without parole : the case of Hungary / Miklós Lévay -- A right to hope? : life imprisonment in France / Marion Vannier -- The paradox of reform : life imprisonment in England and Wales / Catherine Appleton and Dirk van Zyl Smit -- Life imprisonment in Belgium : current human rights challenges / Sonja Snacken, Ineke Casier, Caroline Devynck and Diete Humblet -- Confusingly compliant with the European Convention on Human Rights : the release of life sentence prisoners in Ireland / Diarmuid Griffin and Ian O'Donnell -- Punishment in Portuguese criminal law : a penal system without life imprisonment / Inês Horta Pinto -- The abolition of life imprisonment in Brazil and its contradictions / Giovanna Frisso -- Long-term imprisonment in Latin America / Francisco Javier de León Villalba -- Life and long-term imprisonment in the countries of the former Yugoslavia / Filip Vojta -- The right to hope for lifers : an analysis of court judgments and practice in Poland / Maria Ejchart-Dubois, Maria Nielaczna and Aneta Wilkowska-Plóciennik -- Long-term and life imprisonment in Spain : release procedures and terrorism / Jon-Mirena Landa Gorostiza -- Constitutional limits on life imprisonment and post-sentence preventive detention in Germany / Axel Dessecker -- Life without parole for preventive reasons : lifelong post-sentence detention in Switzerland / Anna Coninx -- Life imprisonment and related institutions in the nordic countries / Tapio Lappi-Seppälä

This article reports estimates of the cumulative risk of imprisonment and parental imprisonment for demographic groups in four regions and four states. Regional and state-level cumulative risks were markedly higher for African Americans and Latinos than for whites. African Americans faced the highest cumulative risks of imprisonment in the Midwest, Northeast, and two southern states. Latinos were most likely to serve time in state prison in the West, where their cumulative risk was comparable to that of African Americans. Latino children had a relatively high risk of having a parent imprisoned in the Northeast as well. Racial disparities in the cumulative risk of imprisonment and parental imprisonment did not increase linearly with increases in the cumulative risk for all groups.

The "pains of imprisonment" is one of the most prominent concepts in the social study of incarceration. First introduced by Gresham Sykes in 1958, it has subsequently been taken up by generations of authors and applied to an increasingly diverse range of contexts, populations, and activities. This article details how the "pains of imprisonment" concept has evolved and expanded. It is based on an analysis of 50 academic works (books, articles, and chapters) that used some variation of the "pains of…" formulation. We identified four main trajectories in the literature that have contributed to this expansion, which we document in the first section through the use of illustrative examples. This is followed by a more critical series of reflections that seek to appreciate some of the organizational and political factors that might account for the appeal of this concept. Finally, we conclude by questioning whether the "pains" framing might paradoxically be a victim of its own success, with its analytical and political purchase potentially blunted through overuse and overextension.