skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 157275 Find in a Library
Title: Strengthening Punishment in the Community
Corporate Author: Penal Affairs Consortium
United Kingdom
Date Published: 1995
Page Count: 4
Sponsoring Agency: Penal Affairs Consortium
London, SW9 0PU, United Kingdom
Sale Source: Penal Affairs Consortium
169 Clapham Road
London, SW9 0PU,
United Kingdom
Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
Language: English
Country: United Kingdom
Annotation: A consortium of organizations concerned with corrections issues in Great Britain concludes that the changes proposed by the British government in its March 1995 Green Paper called Strengthening Punishment in the Community would do nothing to reduce recidivism, would confuse rather than clarify the framework for community sentencing, and are likely to increase the use of imprisonment.
Abstract: The Green Paper identifies the three main purposes of community punishment as restriction of liberty, reparation, and the prevention of reoffending. The consortium agrees with these goals but opposes removal of the statutory acknowledgment that one of the purposes of a probation order is offender rehabilitation. The consortium recommends several actions to improve the effectiveness of community supervision, based on research revealing that some types of community supervision can reduce reconviction rates by 2 to 50 percent. These include programs that confront offending behavior and attitudes, teach offenders to restrain aggression and impulsive behavior, and provide them with skills training and employment. However, the availability of such programs varies. Such programs would do far more to reduce crime than would changing the names of sentences or increasing the amount of detail in court orders.
Main Term(s): Foreign courts
Index Term(s): Criminal justice system policy; Criminology; Foreign correctional systems; Great Britain/United Kingdom
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.