The “Gunther Special” is an innovative sentencing program for youthful DUI offenders based on a deterrence rationale. Program requirements include a visit to the morgue to view bodies of accident victims, a 4-hour Saturday night visit to a hospital emergency room, a 1-hour education/ counseling interview with a family nurse practitioner, and a 1,000-word essay to be presented to the court within 6 months reflecting on these experiences. A comparison of 168 offenders completing the program and 168 individually matched controls unequivocally indicates the failure of the program to reduce recidivism rates.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bureau of Justice Statistics . (1986). State and federal prisoners, 1925-85. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
2.
Divoky, D. (1986a, June 23). Sobering point is driven home. Sacramento Bee, pp. A1, A8.
3.
Divoky, D. (1986b, December 23). MADD honors three Sacramentans. Sacramento Bee, p. B3.
4.
Donovan, D. M. (1989). Driving while intoxicated: Different roads to and from the problem. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 16, 270-298.
5.
Finckenauer, J. O. (1982). Scared straight and the panacea phenomenon, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
6.
Henetz, P. (1990, May 14). Drunken drivers go to morgue. Sacramento Union, pp. A1, A4.
7.
Hubert, C. (1988, December 11). Program gives youths jolting look at victims of drinking, driving. Des Moines Register, pp. 1A, 6A.
8.
Jones, L. (1988, May 9). 1st-time drunk driving offenders given firsthand look at victims. Los Angeles Times, Part 2, p. 8.
9.
Kingsnorth, R. , & Jungsten, M. (1988). Driving under the influence: The impact of legislative reform on court sentencing practices. Crime & Delinquency, 34, 3-28.
10.
Kingsnorth, R. , Barnes, C., & Coonley, P. (in press). Driving under the influence: The role of legal and extralegal variables in court sentencing practices. Criminal Justice Policy Review.
11.
Klein, I. W. (1990, January 25). Judge implements new sentencing for DUI. Daily Trojan, p. 11.
12.
Latessa, E. J. , & Vito, G. F. (1988). The effects of intensive supervision on shock probationers. Journal of Criminal Justice, 16, 319-330.
13.
Lewis, R. V. (1983). Scared straight-California style: Evaluation of the San Quentin Squire Program. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 10, 209-226.
14.
Morash, M. , & Rucker, L. (1990). A critical look at the idea of boot camp as correctional reform. Crime and Delinquency, 36, 204-222.
15.
Ross, H. L. (1984). Deterring the drinking driver (2nd ed.). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
16.
Swenson, S. E. (1989, February 21). Facing reality: Drunk driver program helps youth recover. Bakersfield Californian, pp. A1, A2.
17.
Vito, G. F. (1984). Developments in shock probation: A review of research findings and policy implications. Federal Probation, 48, 22-27.
18.
Walker, S. (1989). Sense and nonsense about crime. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
19.
Wilson, D. (1988, September 21). Compulsory look at death for young drunk drivers. New York Times, pp. 8(N), A10(L).
