Abstract
Parole, an extension of discretion to mitigate sentences for "rehabili tated" offenders, has had some negative consequences. The preponderance of empirical study also shows that parole supervision is not critical in determining community success, is not cost-effective, does not protect the public, and does not provide for the equal administration of justice. The difficulties lie not with personnel but with the criminal justice system.
Rehabilitation, therefore, is not an appropriate basis of a sentence structure or institutional operation. A flat sentence, with unconditional discharge at its expiration, would invite the prisoner to participate in rehabilitative programs if he was genuinely interested in them, not because he wanted to impress the parole board.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.