THE REHABILITATION THEORY SUGGESTS THAT TREATMENT IS BETTER THAN PUNISHMENT. HOWEVER, THE TREATMENT IS FORCED WHICH MAKES IT A FORM OF PUNISHMENT. OFTEN TREATMENT IS PRESCRIBED FOR A CONDITION WHICH NO LONGER EXISTS AND, AS THERE IS NO ELEMENT OF PUBLICITY OR DETERRENCE IN THE TREATMENT, FUTURE CRIME IS NOT PREVENTED. THE UTILITARIAN APPROACH USES PREVENTION AND REFORM AS ITS CORNERSTONES; AGAIN THE PROBLEM OF DETERRENCE IS IGNORED. THE RETRIBUTIVISTS ARE CONCERNED ONLY WITH DETERRENCE AND PUNISHMENT. RETRIBUTIVIST THEORY CAN BE MORE EASILY INCORPORATED INTO REHABILITATION AND UTILITARIANISM THAN THE CORRECTIONAL APPROACH CAN BE INCORPORATED INTO A PURELY PUNITIVE SYSTEM. PUNISHMENT NEEDS TO BE ACCEPTED AS A NATURAL CONDITION OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, BUT TO BE EFFECTIVE, PUNISHMENT MUST DENY THE CRIMINAL THE FRUITS OF HIS CRIME. IN CASES SUCH AS RAPE THIS IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE. THEN DETERRENCE BECOMES THE PRIMARY PURPOSE. THIS IS WHY THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH THEORIES OF PUNISHMENT. IN ACTUAL APPLICATION THERE IS NO ONE CONNECTED SET OF ARGUMENTS, NO ONE THEORY, THAT DEALS ADEQUATELY WITH ALL OF THE FACTORS WHICH SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.