Call/WhatsApp: +1 332 209 4094

Corrections: objectives and issues for alternative sentencing.

Corrections: objectives and issues for alternative sentencing.

Discuss objectives and issues for alternative sentencing.
To help you with this part, consider the discussion of various alternative sanctions (where alternative
sentencing may focus on sanctions other than or replacing incarceration) in your textbook Chapter 7.
Identify ways in which probation meets or fails to meet the goals of sentencing, considering how probation is
not often perceived as a function of corrections.

To provide a sentencing option for judges: Once an offender in incarcerated his/her household may become financially and emotionally shaky. The offender can no longer provide for the family, which may cause the family to become Social Service recipients. Therefore, taxpayers are not only paying for the offender’s imprisonment, but also for the family’s welfare.

If the transaction of the great is bought, the offender’s economic reputation can be stressed in cases on indigence and also for those in a financially protected scenario, a great is not an annoyance, therefore, there is no consequence.

In the website traffic situation where revocation of any driver’s permit might appear appropriate, the offender may no longer have transportation to his/her place of career, university, healthcare establishments, and many others.

Local community Service offers an alternative to Judges to ensure that such struggles could be avoided in selected cases. At the Judge’s discretion, non-violent offenders may instead be offered the opportunity to contribute a designated number of hours of unpaid Community Service work. Reduce the Jail population: By sentencing non-violent offenders to complete Community Service in lieu of Jail time, local Jails can make better use of their limited space to house the serious, repeat, and violent offenders. To enable offenders to continue to meet family, employment and academic obligations: One of the basic objectives of the program is to schedule Community Service work assignment so that it does not conflict with the offender’s employment, school, or counseling obligations. This is done by inquiring as to employment and/or academic schedules, etc. For instance, if a volunteer is employed from 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, service work is expected to be contributed in the evening and/or weekends. In consideration of the volunteer’s personal obligations, the Community Service Program requires that an average of eight hours per week of service be contributed for those employed and/or in school on a full-time basis. To utilize the work as a rehabilitation tool: By introducing clients to non-profit organizations and agencies, they learn about services that are provided to the community in which may also be of use to them. The volunteers are required to be reliable, cooperative, and hard-working during their participation in the Alternative Sentencing Program. Some volunteers’ lifestyles have not been structured in such a way as to be able to do so. In this program, they must overcome certain non-productive attitudes such as; failure to show for work, constant tardiness, poor work quality and being uncooperative.

Failing to accomplish this contributes to termination through the program. It is hoped that deprivation of leisure time and a commitment to labor will have a significant impact on the volunteers in not wanting to get involved in criminal acts again. In some cases, volunteers meet people through their service work who are supportive of their individual social, economic, and emotional needs, which may offer the clients some needed support and guidance.

Seeking ahead of time, the Substitute Sentencing Plan can anticipate a carried on development in the amount of Neighborhood Assistance clientele it assists. The Alternative Sentencing Program hopes to enlist continued community support and to be able to even better serve the community with the volunteer’s services. To supply staffing to public and non-profit agencies: Thousands of persons have been referred to the Alternative Sentencing Program to complete numerous hours of volunteer service. All work-sites that receive these volunteers are public and private non-profit agencies. There are a number of work-sites in and around the area and new agencies and organizations are constantly being sought. There are substantial savings to the taxpayers for Community Service work.

In Prince Edward Tropical isle, a variety of individuals the criminal justice method had been interviewed to evaluate their perceptions of substitute sentencing dispositions. The following ~iscussion is based on their responses to the interview questions. In some cases, the nature of the offence or characteristics of the offender necessitates a jail sentence. For example, dangerous offenders or those who cannot be deterred by any other methods or where no alternative or other sentencing option is appropriate. At other times prison is definitely not the right sentence for an offender. However, when some type of sanction must be applied or when it is felt that the offender could benefit from intervention, alternative programmes seem to fit the bill. These offenders can always be brought back and sentenced to jail on default of a noncarceral option. There is a general consensus among the parties interviewed that alternative dispositions are not true alternatives in all cases, but rather that prison is usually considered a “last resort” or a method of incapacitation. The Director of Probation and Family Court Services noted that as probation conditions were expanded with restitution, rehabilitation programmes and the advent of CSO in the late 1970’s, jail sentences decreased and the number of probation orders increased. As an explanation for this outcome, he speculated that jail is being used less now in conjunction with more probation resulting in a decrease in the number of inmate days served and an increase in probation days and community service hours. All the individuals felt that the range of programmes as it presently exists is too restrictive and various other programmes were suggested. Among the programmes proposed were a fine option to reduce the expense of jailing fine defaulters; a formalized diversion programme, e.g., for shoplifters; greater emphasis on victim restoration, recovery and compensation; greater use of counselling programmes; and programmes that benefit the elderly. In P.E.I. there is already an attempt to equate fines and community service hours. However: the judge did not feel a need to broaden this equation to include time spent in jail. He indicated that if noncarceral sentences are not true alternatives then they cannot be equivalent. He added that offenders should be able to choose between fines and community service but not jail. A further problem with finding an equivalent for jail time is the question of remission. One police officer cautioned of the abuses that could take place if the offender were free to choose between sentences. The defence lawyer, although expressing a need for standardization, disapproved of allowing an offender the opportunity to pay a fine instead of performing community service work because this . option means that people can buy their way out of the sentence and it did not ensure that individual dif.ferences were considered. Furthermore, a community member noted that paying a fee instead of performing community service work may not be serving any sentencing objective if the fee is paid by the offender’s parents.