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: 78396 Find in a Library
Title: Young Offenders, 2 - Custodial Sentences for Young Adult Offenders - A Critique
Journal: Howard Journal of Penology and Crime Prevention  Volume:20  Issue:2  Dated:(1981)  Pages:90-96
Author(s): A Brown
Date Published: 1981
Page Count: 7
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United Kingdom
Annotation: The British Government's white paper entitled 'Young Offenders' is interpreted and critiqued.
Abstract: The white paper on young offenders consciously avoids presenting a philosophical framework within which to justify a system of custodial measures for juveniles. The paper advocates greater use of noncustodial measures while simultaneously proposing measures apparently designed to ensure an increase in the use of custodial sentences. For the custodial regimes, the broad intentions seem to be to maintain a primarily punitive, deterrent approach to both the short-term and the long-term offenders, while retaining a general treatment strategy for those serving 4 through 18 months. Neither approach is likely to be successful if the objective is to reduce the rate of reconviction. One major handicap in developing more progressive custodial regimes has been the confusion about the reasons for giving the sentence; namely, the nature of the offense and the objectives of the custodial program. Officially, the punishment in a custodial sentence is viewed as residing solely in the deprivation of liberty. If this were genuinely the case, it should follow that, within the inevitable constraints necessary in any ordered community, individuals would have wide discretion over their own lifestyles. This should be the policy direction for custodial regimes. Rigid treatment programs on one hand and punitive custodial environments on the other have not worked. The provision of voluntary programs and activities within a custodial setting may be the best approach. Six references are listed. (Author abstract modified)
Index Term(s): England; Foreign juvenile justice systems; Juvenile correctional facilities; Juvenile Corrections/Detention; Policy analysis
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.