Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

American penology: Words, deeds, and consequences

  • Published:
Crime, Law and Social Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A primary argument underlying this paper is that it is possible to capture a particular theory or conceptual rationale in the development of a penal program strategy. Further, it is possible to implement the program in a way that corresponds to both the program strategy and theory and then to evaluate the program to determine the adequacy of both the program strategy and the theory upon which it is based. The history of U.S. penal reform does not illustrate this potential, however. Rather, U.S. penal reforms have been implemented without evaluation and have resulted in a pattern of unintended consequences, most notably increased social control and an associated undermining of democratic rights and individual freedoms, without any corresponding decline in crime. These trends and outcomes are documented in order to draw penal program and evaluation policy implications for the U.S. and their ever expanding penal complex and the Czech Republic in their ongoing efforts to implement a penal system consistent with their newly emerging democratic society.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes and references

  1. Robert Martinson, "What Works? Questions and Answers About Prison Reform." The Public Interest, 1974 (35), 22–34.

    Google Scholar 

  2. These studies include James Austin and Barry Krisberg, "Wider, Stronger, and Different Nets: The Dialectics of Criminal Justice Reform," Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1981 (18), 165–196; Thomas Blomberg, "Diversion and Accelerated Social Control," The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1977 (68): 274-282; Mark Ezell, "Juvenile Arbitration: Net-Widening and Other Unintended Consequences," Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1989 (6), 58-377;Malcolm Klein, "Desinstitutionalization and Diversion of Juvenile Offenders: A Litany of Impediments," in Norval Morris and Michael Tonry (eds) Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research(Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1979); Edwin Lemert, "Diversion in Juvenile Justice: What Hath Been Wrought?" Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1981 (19), 34-36; Anthony Platt, The Child Savers: The Invention of Delinquency(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969); Kenneth Polk, "Youth Service Bureaus: The Record and Prospects" (Mimeo, Eugene: University of Oregon, 1981); David Rothman, The Discovery of the Asylum(Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1971); David Rothman, Conscience and Convenience: The Asylum and its Alternatives in Progressive America(Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1980); Steven L. Schlossman, Love and the American Delinquent(Chicago Press, 1977); Andrew Scull, Decarceration (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1977); Melossi, Dario and Massimo Pavarini, 1981. The Prison and the Factory. Totowa, NJ: Barnes & Noble Books.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Thomas G. Blomberg, "Diversion and Accelerated Social Control," The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1977 (68), 274–282; Thomas G. Blomberg,William Bales, and Karen Reed, "Intermediate Punishments: Redistributing or Extending Social Control?" Crime, Law, and Social Change, 1993 (19), 187-201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kathryn Preyer, "Penal Measures in the American Colonies: An Overview," The American Journal of Legal History, 1982 (XXVI), 326–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. David Rothman, The Discovery of the Asylum (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  6. David Rothman, The Discovery of the Asylum (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish (New York: Vintage Books, 1977).

    Google Scholar 

  8. David Rothman, The Discovery of the Asylum (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gustave De Beaumont and Alexis De Tocqueville, On the Penitentiary System in the United States and its Application in France (1883 edition; Southern Illinois University Press, 1964), pp. 1–18.

  10. Charles Dickens, American Notes (1842; Penguin ed., 1972), p. 146, 148.

  11. David Rothman, The Discovery of the Asylum (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Lawrence M. Friedman, Crime and Punishment in American History (New York: Basic Books, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  13. David Rothman, The Discovery of the Asylum (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  14. David Rothman, The Discovery of the Asylum (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Zebulon R. Brockway, "The American Reformatory System," in Prison Reform: Correction and Prevention (Russell Sage Foundation, 1910).

  16. Zebulon R. Brockway, "The American Reformatory System," in Prison Reform: Correction and Prevention (Russell Sage Foundation, 1910).

  17. Lawrence M. Friedman, Crime and Punishment in American History (New York: Basic Books, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  18. David Rothman, Conscience and Convenience (Boston: Little, Brown, 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Steven L. Schlossman, Love and the American Delinquent (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Stanley Cohen, Visions of Social Control (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Aaron V. Cicourel, The Social Organization of Juvenile Justice (New York: Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1968); Robert M. Emerson, Judging Delinquents: Context and Process in Juvenile Court(Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1969).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Howard S. Becker, The Outsiders (New York: Free Press, 1963).

    Google Scholar 

  27. James Austin, Barry Krisberg and W. Lawrence, Open Space, Community Detention, Pittsburgh-Antioch Diversion and (AB312): Diverting the Status Offender (San Francisco: Research Center West, National Council on Crime and Delinquency, 1978); Thomas Blomberg, "Diversion and Accelerated Social Control," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1977 (62), 274-282; Marvin Bohnstedt, "Answer to Three Questions about Juvenile Diversion," Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1978 (15), 109-123; Franklin W. Dunford, "Police Diversion: An Illusion?" Criminology, 1977 (15), 335-352; E. Duxbury, Evaluation of North Service Bureaus(Sacramento: California Youth Authority, 1973); Delbert S. Elliott, Evaluation of Youth Service Systems: FY 1973(Boulder: Behavioral Research and Evaluation Corporation, 1974); Don C. Gibbons and Gerald F. Blake, "Evaluating the Impact of Juvenile Diversion Programs," Crime and Delinquency, 1976 (22), 411-420; Laud Humphreys and Joseph M. Carrier, "Law Enforcement Screening for Diversion," Second Annual Evaluation Report: Pomona Valley Juvenile Diversion Project (Claremont: Pitzer College, 1976);Malcolm Klein, "Issues and Relations in Police Diversion Programs," Crime and Delinquency, 1976 (22), 421-427; Richard Lundman, "Will Diversion Reduce Recidivism?" Crime and Delinquency, 1976 (4), 28-437; Michael McAleenan, The West San Gabriel Valley Juvenile Diversion Project: Annual Report, Second Year(Los Angeles California: Occidental College, 1976); Elizabeth Vorenberg and James Vorenberg, "Early Diversion from the Criminal Justice System: Practice in Search of a Theory," pp. 151-183 in Prisoners in America, edited by L.E. Ohlin (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1973); James Hackler, 1976, "Logical Reasoning versus Unanticipated Consequences: Diversion Programs as an Illustration," Ottawa Law Review8: 285-289.

    Google Scholar 

  28. C. Alder and Kenneth Polk, "Diversion and Hidden Sexism," Australian and New Zealand Institute of Criminology, 1982 (15), 100–108; Delbert S. Elliott, F.W. Dunsford and G. Knowles, Diversion: A Study of Alternative Processing Practices. Final Report to the Center for Studies on Crime and Delinquency, KIMH (Boulder: Behavioral Research Institute, 1978); R. Fishman, Criminal Recidivism in New York City: An Evaluation of the Impact of Rehabilitation and Diversion Services(New York: Praeger, 1977); Malcolm Klein, 1975, Alternative Dispositions for Juvenile Offenders(Los Angeles: University of Southern California); Thomas Blomberg, G. Heald and Mark Ezell, "Diversion and Net Widening: A Cost Savings Assessment," Evaluation Review, 1986 (10), 55-64.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Thomas Blomberg, "Diversion and Accelerated Social Control," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 1977 (68), 274–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kenneth Polk, Youth Service Bureaus (Eugene: University of Oregon, 1981); Paul Nejelski, "Diversion: The Promise and Danger," Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1976 (22), 393-410.

    Google Scholar 

  31. C.H. Blew and R. Rosenblum, "An Exemplary Project: The Community Arbitration Project; Anne Arundel County, Maryland, "A Juvenile Justice Alternative" (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Development, Testing and Dissemination; NILECT, LEAA, 1976); Roger Baron, Floyd Feeney and Warren Thornton, "Preventing Delinquency through Diversion," Federal Probation, 1973 (37), 13-18; Richard Ku and Carol H. Blew, A University's Approach to Delinquency Prevention: The Adolescent Diversion Project(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1977); H.C. Quay ad C.T. Love, "The Effect of a Juvenile Diversion Program on Rearrests," Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1977 (4), 377-396.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Andrew Scull, Decarceration: Community Treatment and the Deviant (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1977).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Daniel J. Curran, "Destructuring, Privatization and the Promise of Juvenile Diversion: Compromising Community-Based Corrections," Crime and Delinquency, 1988 (34), 363–378.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Robert Martinson, "What Works? Questions and Answers about Prison Reform," The Public Interest, 1974 (35), 22–34.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Antony Duff and David Garland, "Preface: E. Rotman's Beyond Punishment," pp. 281–283 in A Reader on Punishment, edited by A. Duff and D. Garland (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Derek B. Cornish and Ronald V.G. Clarke, The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending (New York: Springer-Verlag, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  37. John Irwin and James Austin, It's About Time: America's Imprisonment Binge (Albany, NY: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Diana R. Gordon, Justice Juggernaut (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Diana R. Gordon, Justice Juggernaut (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Diana R. Gordon, Justice Juggernaut (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  41. NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Death Row USA, Fall 1995.

  42. Joan Petersilia, Susan Turner and Elizabeth Deschenes, "Intensive Supervision Probation for Drug Offenders," pp. 18–37, in Smart Sentencing, edited by James M. Byrne, Arthur J. Lurigio and Joan Petersilia (Sage Publications, 1992).

  43. Thomas G. Blomberg, William Bales and Karen Reed, "Intermediate Punishments: Redistributing or Extending Social Control?" Crime, Law, and Social Change, 1993 (19), 187–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Thomas Blomberg and Karol Lucken, "Stacking the Deck by Piling Up Sanctions," Howard Journal, 1994 (33), 62–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Joan Petersilia and Susan Turner, "Intensive Probation and Parole," in Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 17, edited by Michael Tonry (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Edward J. Latessa, "The Effectiveness of Intensive Supervision with High Risk Probationers," pp. 99–112, in Intermediate Punishments: Intensive Supervision, Home Confinement, and Electronic Surveillance, edited by Belinda R.McCarthy (Monsey, New York: Criminal Justice Press, 1992); Frank S. Pearson and Alice G. Harper, 1990, "New Jersey's Intensive Supervision Program," Crime and Delinquency, 36 (1): 75-86; Joan Petersilia and Susan Turner, "Comparing Intensive and Regular Supervision for High-Risk Probationers: Early Results from an Experiment in California," Crime and Delinquency, 1990, 36 (1): 87-111.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Florida Department of Corrections, Annual Report 1996/1997 (Tallahassee, FL: Florida Department of Corrections, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Camille Graham Camp and George M. Camp, The Corrections Yearbook (South Salem, NY: Criminal Justice Institute, Inc., 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Julian V. Roberts, "American Attitudes about Punishment: Myth and Reality," Overcrowded Times, 1992, Vol. 3, No. 2; Jenkiko Begasse, "Oregonians Support Alternatives for Nonviolent Offenders," Overcrowded Times, 1995, Vol. 6, No. 4.

  50. Robert J. Lilly and Paul Knepper, "The Corrections-Commercial Complex," Crime and Delinquency, 1993 (39), 150–166; see Robert J. Lilly and Matthieu Deflem, "Profit and Penalty: An Analysis of the Corrections Commercial Complex," Crime and Delinquency, 1996 (42), 3-20.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Christine Bowditch and Ronald S. Everett, "Private Prisons: Problems within the Solution," Justice Quarterly, 1987 (4), 441–453; Marcia Chambers, "The Term, Prison Industry Now Means Business," National Law Journal, 1993 (25), 17-19; Douglas W. Dunham, "Inmates Rights and the Privatization of Prisons," Columbia Law Review, 1986 (86), 1475-1504; Alexis M. Durham, "The Future of Correctional Privatization: Lessons from the Past," pp. 33-49, in Privatizing Correctional Institutions, edited by G.W. Bowman, S. Hakim and P. Seidenstat (New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1994); Joseph Field, "Making Prisons Private: An Improper Delegation of a Government Power," Hofstra Law Review, 1987 (15): 649-751; James T. Gentry, "The Panopticon Revisited: The Problem of Monitoring Private Prisons," Yale Law Journal, 1986 (96), 353-375; Todd Mason, "For Profit Jails: A Risky Business," pp. 163-174, in Privatizing Correctional Institutions, edited by G.W. Bowman, S. Hakim and P. Seidenstat (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, 1994); Robert G. Porter, "The Privatization of Prisons in the U.S.: A Policy that Britain Should Not Emulate," Howard Journal, 1994 (29), 65-81; Ira Robbins, "Privatization of Corrections: Defining the Issues," Vanderbilt Law Review, 1987 (40), 813-828; Karol Lucken, "Privatizing Discretion: Rehabilitating Treatment in Community Corrections," Crime and Delinquency, 1977 (43), 243-259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Russell Jacoby, Dogmatic Wisdom (New York: Anchor Books, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA

    Thomas Blomberg & Mark Yeisley

  2. Department of Criminal Justice, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

    Karol Lucken

Authors
  1. Thomas Blomberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark Yeisley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Karol Lucken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Blomberg, T., Yeisley, M. & Lucken, K. American penology: Words, deeds, and consequences. Crime, Law and Social Change 28, 269–286 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008233500140

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008233500140

Keywords

Search

Navigation