The multiple dimensions of punishment, intermediate sanctions and interchangeability with imprisonment

grantor: University of TorontoReform strategies, and sentencing legislation for both adults and youth in Canada and elsewhere have attempted to create 'intermediate' sanctions that can be made equivalent and interchangeable with sentences of imprisonment. These sanctions may have the potential to reduce the use of imprisonment through interchangeability, so long as sanctions can be equivalent to imprisonment in severity. Implicit in these theories of punishment, however, is the assumption of the acceptability of interchangeable, 'intermediate' sanctions. It is assumed that the most critical dimension to punishment is severity. This thesis challenges these simplistic conceptualizations of punishment, and presents an analysis of the perceived appropriateness of punishment. I argue it is critical to examine the functions that punishments are seen (by judges and the public) as serving. Authors writing about interchangeability, and sentencing legislation for adults and youth, however, have given insufficient attention to the offence being punished and the offender who is the recipient of the punishment. It is suggested that these approaches to sentencing and punishment will be inadequate until a combination of factors are addressed that are part of the sentencing process. The findings demonstrate that fines, community service orders, and conditional sentences cannot be assumed to be generally accepted as equally interchangeable with imprisonment across all purposes, offences, or offenders--adults and youth. Different punishments were seen as appropriate in different contexts. The four studies presented in Chapters two through five demonstrate that denunciation is viewed as an important purpose by members of the public and judges for offences involving violence. In these cases, 'intermediate' sanctions were seen as lacking the denunciatory power that the prison achieves, and were less likely to be viewed as appropriate than imprisonment for violent and sexual offences. It may be possible to create punishments that are seen as equivalent to imprisonment in severity. This thesis reveals, however, that there are multiple dimensions to punishment--beyond severity--that are considered by the public and judges when assessing the appropriateness of punishment. Punishments must be understood as being complex and varying along qualitative as well as quantitative dimensions.Ph.D