Shifting the practice of coercive penal care over time in a problem-solving court

Marisa Omori, Jacqueline G. Lee, Rachel Lautenschlager
{"title":"Shifting the practice of coercive penal care over time in a problem-solving court","authors":"Marisa Omori, Jacqueline G. Lee, Rachel Lautenschlager","doi":"10.1177/14624745231192367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While problem-solving courts represent one area in which rehabilitative efforts have expanded within correctional settings as “coercive penal care,” still unexplored is how the blend of rehabilitative and punitive practices might evolve over time. By conducting interviews and observing a new reentry court, we explore how the court's navigation of coercive penal care transforms over time. We argue that initially, the introduction of rehabilitative goals was mostly subverted by the court's existing punitive criminal legal system and organizational structure. This occurred through court actors prioritizing internal over external goals and metrics in the program, and articulating self-responsibilization narratives for success. As the court progressed, court actors shifted toward emphasizing individualism. Increased individualism occurred in recognition of the complex barriers that participants faced, but presented a double-edged sword: actors focused more on the individual needs of participants beyond program requirements, but also increased individual accountability by participants. This greater emphasis on individualization also allowed court actors to resolve sometimes competing rehabilitative and punitive goals through increased discretion.","PeriodicalId":148794,"journal":{"name":"Punishment & Society","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Punishment & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14624745231192367","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While problem-solving courts represent one area in which rehabilitative efforts have expanded within correctional settings as “coercive penal care,” still unexplored is how the blend of rehabilitative and punitive practices might evolve over time. By conducting interviews and observing a new reentry court, we explore how the court's navigation of coercive penal care transforms over time. We argue that initially, the introduction of rehabilitative goals was mostly subverted by the court's existing punitive criminal legal system and organizational structure. This occurred through court actors prioritizing internal over external goals and metrics in the program, and articulating self-responsibilization narratives for success. As the court progressed, court actors shifted toward emphasizing individualism. Increased individualism occurred in recognition of the complex barriers that participants faced, but presented a double-edged sword: actors focused more on the individual needs of participants beyond program requirements, but also increased individual accountability by participants. This greater emphasis on individualization also allowed court actors to resolve sometimes competing rehabilitative and punitive goals through increased discretion.
随着时间的推移,在解决问题的法庭上改变强制刑罚的做法
虽然解决问题的法庭代表了一个领域,在惩教机构中,康复工作已经扩展为“强制性刑事护理”,但仍未探索的是,随着时间的推移,康复和惩罚性做法的结合将如何演变。通过采访和观察一个新的再入法院,我们探讨了法院对强制刑罚护理的导航如何随着时间的推移而变化。我们认为,最初,康复目标的引入主要被法院现有的惩罚性刑事法律制度和组织结构所颠覆。这是通过法院行为者优先考虑内部目标而不是外部目标和项目指标,并阐明成功的自我责任叙述来实现的。随着宫廷的发展,宫廷演员转向强调个人主义。在认识到参与者面临的复杂障碍后,个人主义的增加出现了,但这是一把双刃剑:参与者更多地关注参与者的个人需求,而不是项目要求,但也增加了参与者的个人责任。这种对个性化的更大强调也允许法院行为者通过增加自由裁量权来解决有时相互竞争的康复和惩罚目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信