Abstract
For many years the nation's criminologists and penologists have denounced the present system of treatment of criminal offenders as unrealistic and unproductive of desirable results. Dissatisfied with legislative tinkering at the peripheries of the problem, they have called for a sweeping re-examination of the basic procedures which appear untenable in the light of modern psychological knowledge.
In prior times the prime motive of society in its treatment of criminals was retribution; today it is still present, although in much reduced form. Deterrence from criminal acts and isolation of dangerous persons are present goals of criminal justice. Primarily, however, the aim is to rehabilitate offenders emotionally and vocationally for life in modern society. The period after sentencing, therefore, must be evaluated primarily on the basis of its success in the accomplishment of rehabilitation and, secondarily, deterrence of crime and isolation of those who cannot be rehabilitated.
The California Plan …
The Massachusetts Plan …
Action Taken in Other States …
Conclusion …
Recommended Citation
Allan J. Garfinkle and Charles H. Beatty,
Individualized Treatment of Criminal Offenders,
33 Neb. L. Rev. 467
(1953)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol33/iss3/11