Sunday, November 11, 2007

More NCJRS Abstracts, November 11, 2007


NCJ 220109
Jodi Lane
Joan Petersilia: A Life of Policy-Relevant Corrections Research
Women & Criminal Justice
Volume:17 Issue:4 Dated:2006 Pages:1 to 17

This article examines the personal life and professional career over the last three decades of Joan Petersilia a preeminent female scholar in the field of criminology. Joan Petersilia has been a significant player in criminology for over 30-years. Her career began in 1974 when Peter Greenwood offered her a job at RAND, a nonprofit research organization in Santa Monica, CA. In 1992, she became a professor at the University of California, Irvine. Her work is revered by academics and highly regarded by policymakers. She is able to blend the academic and practitioner world. She is able to speak to virtually any audience and for this reason; she is one of the most well known criminologists and corrections scholars in the world. She has published almost 100 articles and book chapters as well as books and monographs. Her work has primarily focused on improving the corrections system through program evaluation and policy-relevant research. Her primary interest has always been community corrections. In the late 1980s, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) funded a research project that she was conducting that evaluated 14 sites in 9 States that were implementing intensive supervision probation and parole programs. This study was unique and groundbreaking because it involved a true experiment with random assignment in the field and shaped the thinking of both scholars and policymakers. Notes, references

NCJ 220116
Toby Seddon
Coerced Drug Treatment in the Criminal Justice System: Conceptual, Ethical and Criminological Issues
Criminology & Criminal Justice
Volume:7 Issue:3 Dated:August 2007 Pages:269 to 286

This article looks at some of the ethical, conceptual, and criminal aspects of coerced drug treatment in the criminal justice system in Britain. The article found that the conceptual confusion that surrounds much of the research to date regarding coerced drug treatment invalidates any definitive statements of success. The ethics of coerced drug treatment is a matter of much debate and raises some fundamental questions. A new phenomenon that has emerged in many western countries is the increasing use of the criminal justice system as a way of making/coercing drug users into treatment. This heavy-handed approach is widespread in Britain. The rationale behind Britain’s policy is: (1) that there is a strong casual connection between drug addiction and acquisitive crime, (2) that treatment is effective in reducing drug-related crime, and (3) that coerced treatment is effective. The article examines coercion itself and motivation, ethical issues posed by coercion, and criminological aspects of the issue. Limitations of the study are discussed. Notes, references

NCJ 220115
Andrew Millie; Jacqueline Tombs; Mike Hough
Borderline Sentencing: A Comparison of Sentencers' Decision Making in England and Wales, and Scotland
Criminology & Criminal Justice
Volume:7 Issue:3 Dated:August 2007 Pages:243 to 267

This articles looks at the differences in sentencing decisions in two jurisdictions: England and Wales, and Scotland. The article recommends that judges and magistrates receive better information about sentence effectiveness, that courts be aware of what is happening to offenders after they are sentenced, and for there to be more uniformity with sentences. However, it was found that despite the differences in legal systems and criminal justice structures, the sentencer’s decision was remarkably similar in both jurisdictions. Since the 1990s, the prison population in England, Wales and Scotland has increased to the point where more people per head of the population imprisoned in both jurisdictions. This article discusses some of the main research findings in the two countries. The author conducted two parallel studies as part of the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation’s Rethinking Crime and Punishment initiative. The studies examined Home Office and Scottish Executive statistics on convictions, general sentencing patterns, trends in the use of imprisonment in the courts, and other research that was relevant. Limitations of the study are discussed. Notes, references

No comments: