Redemption in an Era of Penal Harm: Moving Beyond Offender Exclusion
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University of Cincinnati / OhioLINK
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ucin1491303605085968 |
| id |
ndltd-OhioLink-oai-etd.ohiolink.edu-ucin1491303605085968 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
oai_dc |
| collection |
NDLTD |
| language |
English |
| sources |
NDLTD |
| topic |
Criminology corrections criminal justice public opinion redemption rehabilitation reentry |
| spellingShingle |
Criminology corrections criminal justice public opinion redemption rehabilitation reentry Thielo, Angela J. Redemption in an Era of Penal Harm: Moving Beyond Offender Exclusion |
| author |
Thielo, Angela J. |
| author_facet |
Thielo, Angela J. |
| author_sort |
Thielo, Angela J. |
| title |
Redemption in an Era of Penal Harm: Moving Beyond Offender Exclusion |
| title_short |
Redemption in an Era of Penal Harm: Moving Beyond Offender Exclusion |
| title_full |
Redemption in an Era of Penal Harm: Moving Beyond Offender Exclusion |
| title_fullStr |
Redemption in an Era of Penal Harm: Moving Beyond Offender Exclusion |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Redemption in an Era of Penal Harm: Moving Beyond Offender Exclusion |
| title_sort |
redemption in an era of penal harm: moving beyond offender exclusion |
| publisher |
University of Cincinnati / OhioLINK |
| publishDate |
2017 |
| url |
http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ucin1491303605085968 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT thieloangelaj redemptioninaneraofpenalharmmovingbeyondoffenderexclusion |
| _version_ |
1719452083337297920 |
| spelling |
ndltd-OhioLink-oai-etd.ohiolink.edu-ucin14913036050859682021-08-03T07:01:10Z Redemption in an Era of Penal Harm: Moving Beyond Offender Exclusion Thielo, Angela J. Criminology corrections criminal justice public opinion redemption rehabilitation reentry For nearly forty years, the United States was in the grips of punitive thinking and mired in an era of mass imprisonment. The hallmarks of this paradigm were the embrace of policies and practices that systematically excluded convicted offenders from full participation in civic, social, and economic life. In recent years, however, it appears that American corrections has experienced a historic transformation that involves efforts to foster offender inclusion in society. Thus, policymakers are increasingly questioning the use of mass imprisonment and are embracing a campaign to downsize American prisons. Similarly, they are advocating for reentry services for released offenders and calling for reductions in the collateral consequences that attach to a criminal conviction. Punitive rhetoric seems in decline, replaced by discussion of the importance of offender rehabilitation and, ultimately, redemption. . This dissertation is an attempt to explore these developments. Specifically, based on a 2017 national, opt-in Internet survey of 1,000 respondents, the study investigates the extent to which the American public rejects the exclusion of offenders and supports their inclusion. In this regard, public support of four aspects of offender inclusion was assessed: the (1) rehabilitation, (2) reentry, (3) reintegration, and (4) redemption of individuals with criminal records. The results reveal that support for offender inclusion is extensive. First, regardless of how it is measured, support for rehabilitation is strong. Americans see rehabilitation as a central goal of prisons, support treatment programs, and favor the new innovation of problem-solving specialty courts. This embrace of treatment is long-standing and must be considered a core American cultural belief or what Alexis de Tocqueville called a “habit of the heart.” Second, the respondents endorsed the concept of prisoner reentry programs, supporting the delivery of an array of supportive services to inmates released to the community. Third, the sample members recognized that collateral consequences could be barriers to offender reintegration, stating that such legal restrictions should be disclosed to criminal defendants, reviewed regularly by legislators, and eliminated if not shown to prevent criminal conduct. The respondents favored voting rights for ex-offenders but were divided on access to jury duty. Support for ban-the-box statutes was high. The subjects were split on the policy of the expungement of records, apparently trying to balance concerns of public safety with concerns over offenders being allowed to resume a prosocial life. It appears that the extent to which citizens permit record expungement is conditioned by how long offenders have been crime free and the dangerousness of the crime committed. Fourth, the public manifested a realistic assessment of the extent to which offenders are capable of leaving a life in crime. Still, about four in five supported rehabilitation ceremonies that would declare ex-offenders “rehabilitated” and the granting of official “certificates of rehabilitation” that could be used when seeking employment, licenses, and other social goods. Taken together, these findings reveal that the American public possesses a “sensibility” (to use Michael Tonry’s term) that is far more inclusionary than exclusionary. Although not necessarily demanding a transformation of correctional policy, it is clear that the citizenry is open to a range of progressive policy initiatives that seek to foster offender redemption in this era of penal harm. 2017-09-07 English text University of Cincinnati / OhioLINK http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ucin1491303605085968 http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ucin1491303605085968 unrestricted This thesis or dissertation is protected by copyright: all rights reserved. It may not be copied or redistributed beyond the terms of applicable copyright laws. |