Essay Example: Should the State Punish Criminal Offenders?

In every structured society, there is some sort of method utilized as an attempt to detain wrongdoers (as deemed by that culture). Oftentimes, this takes the form of some sort of prison system, the United States is no different. However, in more recent years there has been a rise in individuals questioning how effective this system is. Therefore, in this paper, I will answer the following question: Why should the state punish criminal offenders and what should be the function of criminal punishment? My thesis is that the state (for the most part) should not punish criminal offenders, but rather take a more rehabilitation-focused approach in order to prepare these individuals to be reintegrated into society, while addressing social failures. By taking a look at the form and function of prisons from other countries, it becomes clear that the United States is a prime example of failure when it comes to their hyperfixation on punitive measures and retribution. From there, I will take a look at the Moral Education Theory of Punishment and discuss its downfalls as an objection to a rehabilitation-emphasized approach.

Active v. Passive Methods

In the first section, I will discuss how active measures for rehabilitation and resocialization are more effective than the passive actions focused intensely on punishment itself. If we look at the way other countries (specifically how Germany and the Netherlands) approach criminal punishment, we can consider the implications for the United States. By regarding incarceration as an opportunity to prepare prisoners for life outside of prisons instead of focusing on punishment with dehumanizing methods, all individuals of society would be better off. Most notably in Germany, “the sole aim of incarceration is to enable prisoners to lead a life of social responsibility free of crime upon release, requiring that prison life be as similar as possible to life in the community” (Subramanian & Shames, 2013). In order to cultivate the skills prisoners need to live better lives in society, those in Germany and the Netherlands are allowed considerable amounts of self expression and control over their lives while they serve their time. Instilling a sense of self worth is highly emphasized through mandated education and work, helping the prisoners develop skills that will help them navigate life after their sentences. This is a stark contrast to the United States, where things like solitary confinement or inhumane treatment of prisoners by the hands of guards is quite common. Losing their sense of self, it is common to see former inmates that struggle with everyday choices or a lack of humanity.

Continuing from their release from prison in the United States, on top of sometimes no longer being able to vote, there is an ever present stigma that makes it harder to get jobs and when they are removed from their own community, returning can be so alienating even after their punishment supposedly "ends". With their methods focused on punishment and retribution, prisoners and former prisoners are essentially being tossed to the side, away from the public’s mind. Not only during the time served in prison, but even after their punishment supposedly “ends.” This of course is not to say that it would not be most beneficial in some cases for former prisoners to remain away from their communities, but those that do very rarely get a real chance. This sort of occurrence, in hand with simply having adapted to a structured prison environment, causes a significant amount of former prisoners to commit crimes that lead to them being reincarcerated. By treating prisoners as people and getting them ready to live in society, they are much less likely to reoffend and recidivism rates are very likely to go down. Rather than having prison sentences focused on punitive efforts, it would be much more productive for society to have them be more goal oriented.

Rehabilitative Efforts Still Needs Other Support

From here, I will highlight the importance of providing rehabilitative aid for those with psychiatric issues as well as how necessary it is for social programs to provide support outside of these prisons. For a system focused on rehabilitation, crimes that are punished would need to be redefined. Emphasis would need to be shifted from petty crimes to larger crimes, an example being drug possession versus drug trafficking. Even in the sense of drug abuse itself, those that are addicted would need to be given access to detoxification or substitution therapy programs, rather than being put in jail and kept out of the public eye (Subramanian & Shames, 2013). Rehabilitation would be especially effective in this sense (in comparison to simple incarceration as it exists in the United States) because drug addiction is inherently a medical instead of a criminal issue. By giving these prisoners the chance to overcome the psychiatric issues holding them back, they have a much greater chance of leading more independent lives upon release.

However, in hand with these rehabilitation efforts, societal measures need to be changed in order to reduce motives for crime before they arise. When the United States is plagued with all sorts of social and systemic failures, it is fairly easy to realize that there are a significant number of crimes committed out of an effort to survive. Social programs that specifically aid low income communities are key. Society as a whole does not benefit from merely using incarceration to tuck away issues like homelessness, unemployment, and mental illness from the public eye. By providing adequate psychiatric care to all inmates, these individuals are actually able to get the help they need, rather than forcing them to work on their issues alone. Because oftentimes, the lack of treatment provided in prisons to those who need it results in psychiatric illnesses getting worse by the time these individuals leave prisons. As a result, these members of society are getting completely abandoned. Giving them medical support during their time in prison allows them to further develop the skills they will need to function and thrive in general society. However, if these individuals stop receiving the support they need to manage their illnesses, any skills they gained through rehabilitative sentencing become meaningless. Therefore, continuing to provide this medical support even outside of prisons is key to lowering recidivism rates and even preventing motivations for crime before they occur.

Moral Education: A Refutation

Some individuals may argue that Moral Education is a better route to take, as to avoid reoffending, criminals need to be better moral citizens. They continue this by reasoning, when individuals understand the moral reason they should not do certain things, they are less likely to choose them. Rather than regarding criminal punishment as an attempt to harm an individual deserving of evil, but to help someone who has strayed from the moral path. Jean Hampton argues that the Moral Education Theory of Punishment is supposed to completely justify punishment, stating that any punishment is fine so long as it is able to teach its recipient why their actions are morally wrong. Comparing punishments to electric fences, Hampton states that humans are able to consider why the electric fence (the moral boundary) exists in the first place. It is ultimately better to increase the morality of a society, giving them the chance to choose more ethical actions, rather than conditioning the individuals to act a certain way in order to avoid punishment or pain (Hampton, 1984). 

This viewpoint is inherently problematic in the sense that it assumes that people who commit crime do so because they are morally wayward, simplifying cases to an issue with ethics. Doing so, this inherently ignores the fact that many crimes are committed as an act of despair or an effort to survive. Oftentimes people, especially those that are struggling, already understand that things like theft are morally wrong and just trying to “teach” these individuals rather than addressing the social issues that lead to these crimes will not lead to change. While rehabilitation should be the ultimate goal, it (just like any other form of criminal punishment) does not work without a drastic increase in social programs. When the needs of the people are met, when they are given the help they need and the opportunities to succeed, society as a whole is better.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the goal of “punishment” by the hands of the state should be rehabilitation. However, the rehabilitation efforts put in place within prisons still need to be conducted concurrently with social programs and efforts for both former prisoners and regular citizens. Addressing the downfalls of society by providing support prevents unnecessary suffering. By actively working to help those in society that needs it most, the state would not only lower crime rates, but increase the standard of living for all of their members.

References

Hampton, J. (1984). The Moral Education Theory of Punishment. JSTOR. Retrieved November

19, 2021, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2265412.

Subramanian, R., & Shames, A. (2013, October). European American Prison Report V3.

VERA Institute of Justice. Retrieved November 18, 2021, from https://www.vera.org/downloads/Publications/sentencing-and-prison-practices-in-german y-and-the-netherlands-implications-for-the-united-states/legacy_downloads/european-am erican-prison-report-v3.pdf.