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: 83145 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Correctional Objectives - A Set of Canadian Options
Author(s): H J Haley; P Lerette
Corporate Author: Canada Solicitor General
Research Division
Date Published: 1981
Page Count: 120
Sponsoring Agency: Canada Solicitor General
Ottawa, Ontario K1A OP8, Canada
National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF
Language: English
Country: Canada
Annotation: This Canadian report examines the four correctional objectives of punishment, offender welfare, nonpunitive crime control, and rehabilitation to provide a basis for efforts to systematically assess the effectiveness of corrections programs.
Abstract: The report is the first to be generated by Canada's Correctional Effectiveness Project, designed to improve the potential effectiveness of correctional agencies in Canada. Current criminal sanctions resulted from a reaction to the use of harsh penal measures such as corporal and capital punishment as well as a growing acceptance of utilitarian ideas within western culture. The use of imprisonment and probation, which take place over extended periods of time, led to the development of correctional bureaucracies which have had little guidance regarding the courses of action to take to ensure the fulfillment of the goals of the sentences of the courts. Correctional officials have also faced growing constraints resulting from societal concerns for justice, humaneness, and utility. Recognition of these influences as well as of offenders' rights has led to the conclusion that corrections should be held accountable for some combination of punishment, offender welfare, nonpunitive crime control, and rehabilitation. Each of these objectives is analyzed in terms of its definition, supporting rationale, evaluation criteria, policy considerations, and research considerations. The logical implications of choosing various options are also summarized. About 150 references are listed.
Index Term(s): Canada; Correctional planning; Correctional reform; Corrections effectiveness; Deterrence effectiveness; Prisoner's rights; Rehabilitation
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.