Corrections

Links for Prison Research [|Federal Prisons] [| State Prisons] [|Nothing Works]

Read Effectiveness of Deterrence as a crime control 1. What are the two types of deterrence?
 * Activity Deterrence**

2. What assumptions do Rational Choice theorist make about why people commit crime?

3. What do you think about the idea of deterrence theory?

Read Scared Straight Not Really 1. What does the research say about the effectiveness of Scared Straight Programs?

2. How does the Swift, Severe, and Certain theory of crime punishment explain the problems with Scared Straight?

3. Why does the media and TV talk shows like programs such as Scared Straight?

Pick any 10 page segment of Steven King's Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption [|Book]. 1. Describe in a paragraph any differences and similarities between the book and the movie ( include a commentary on your preferences) 2. Based on the movie, pick out and describe how each of the following theories of punishment were exemplified in the movie. - rehabilitation - incapacitation - deterrence - retribution Tell which parts of the movie showed which theory and how.
 * Shawwhank Redemption Activity**

3. A few times in the movie older inmates were said to be "institutionalized". Brooks Hanlon was, and Red also thought he may have been. What does that concept mean and how could that be a bad thing at the time of parole?

Dead Men Walking Resource [|Click Here for Resources on the interviews with real people from the story of Dead Men Walking]

Time Magazine Corporal Punishment [|Click Here]

=US Supreme Court and Corporal Punishment= The Supreme Court case that now provides the foundation for **//corporal//** **//punishment//** policies is Ingraham v. Wright (1977). Two students, James Ingraham and Roosevelt Andrews, suffered severe paddlings in their Florida junior high school that left Ingraham needing medical attention for severe pain and bruising and Andrews unable in one instance to use his arm for a week. Their suit argued that the paddlings were unconstitutional, in violation of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual **//punishment//** and also of the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of due process. The Court, however, rejected both arguments. Because **//corporal//** **//punishment//** has long been common among parents and school officials alike, the Court found, it could not be classified as "cruel and unusual." Moreover, the Court found that the Eighth Amendment is intended to protect criminals, not schoolchildren, and that children who suffered severe **//punishment//** could gain redress by prosecuting officials on such charges as assault and battery, a recourse thought to be sufficient protection for children.

Although many parents and students have indeed sought legal redress for severe beatings, they rarely win in court--making it especially difficult to understand why President Bush has supported a legislative effort to prohibit lawsuits against educators (Breaking 2001; Spare 2001). Courts have found in favor of schools and teachers even when the **//punishment//** they imposed included paddling a nine-year-old seven times within half an hour; sticking a straight pin into a student's arm; confining children in closets and other small, dark spaces; slamming them into walls; and stuffing and/or taping children's mouths (Hyman and Snook 1999). Parents have also been dismayed to lose cases filed after a child was paddled without parental permission. Unless a school chooses to abide by parental wishes, parents in states where **//corporal//** **//punishment//** is legal can protect their children from beatings only by removing them from schools that employ paddling.

Sometimes the offenses against children are so egregious that it seems unbelievable that courts would find for schools and against the family, but it routinely happens. For example, one seventeen-year-old female, who was both an honor student and a senior with no prior record of misbehavior, skipped school. This young adult was forced to bend over a desk and submit to several blows inflicted by an adult male coach whom she had trusted until the incident. For the girl, consequences included not only the physical pain of the beating, but also menstrual hemorrhaging and long-lasting emotional trauma. Despite arguments that the case involved not only physical but also sexual abuse, the school won the case (Hyman and Snook 1999). In fact, over and over again **//corporal//** **//punishment//** has been linked to sexual abuse, although many state legislators who could outlaw the practice apparently remain unmoved by such arguments (see Donahue 2001, for example, or Johnson 1994, and others listed on Project NoSpank's Web page "Spanking Can Be Sexual Abuse," available < __ http://nospank.net/101.htm __ >).

Nor is any special consideration offered to students with disabilities, for whom courts have upheld paddling, isolation, and mouth taping as **//punishments//**. In one case, a disabled student was forced to do exercise so rigorous that it led to his death (Hyman and Snook 1999). Rather than finding such incidents a cause for restraining **//corporal//** **//punishment//**, legislators have blithely moved forward toward solidifying educators' legal right to impose physical **//punishment//** on students with disabilities. In June 2001, a bill enabling discipline of the disabled was introduced by U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama and passed the United States Senate.

[|PA Law: Corporal Punishment] [|States with Corporal Punishment]