The article is based on evaluations of mediation programs in seven sites in Arizona in 1993 and evaluations of shock incarceration and home arrest during 1990-1993. The authors were struck by the similarities in the interpretations of alternative dispute resolution programs such as mediation and alternatives to incarceration programs such as home arrest and shock incarceration. The authors found that the opposing construction of these programs are similar, although they are institutionally separate programs and usually not considered together by analysts. They conclude by discussing the policy consequences of each and suggest that the claimsmakers who believe that the programs are beneficial will probably prevail in the moral discourse, although considerable opposition is developing to these claims. References