The reform demands emerging from this process are not based on so-called radical criminology. In the new way of thinking there is no confidence in the ability of the criminal justice system to abolish criminality, and the idea that coercive sanctions can 'cure the criminal of his criminality' has been abandoned. Sometimes it is argued that other sanctions, e.g., administrative sanctions, could deal with detrimental acts. The idea that a certain level of sanctions is necessary to ensure effective general prevention is rejected, and this refers, above all, to the prevalence of prison sentences. There has been a strong trend toward decriminalization in practically every European nation. It is often claimed that it is not enough that sentencing is fair; the law itself must be fair. A tendency exists to supplement demand for procedural justice with demands for substantial justice. The Scandinavian way of thinking may differ from the new American movement in emphasizing this point of view. Its ideology resembles the American 'just deserts' movement, but there is at least one major difference. The Scandinavian policy believes in prevention-oriented rationality in thinking about crimes and sanctions. In Scandinavian jurisprudence a certain amount of punishment is hardly ever motivated by the statement that the offender 'deserves' it, but rather for general prevention or individual warning.