Community Based Punishment Analysis

The use of community-based punishment has been steadily increasing throughout the Australian justice system, reflecting the new decarceration approach to the penal system. Stanley Cohen (1985) uses the concept of net widening to argue that community based punishment is not effective in reducing imprisonment rates. Cohen would argue that we should not make greater use of community based punishment, however he may support its use if reforms were made. This essay will examine and critically analyse Cohen’s arguments and critiques against the increased use of community-based punishment. The net widening approach will be examined in relation to Australia’s penal system, assessing the effectiveness of community correction orders and the use of case

Community based punishment was introduced because it was seen to be more effective in setting appropriate punishment for minor offenders and allowing offenders to serve their punishment in the community. As Cohen (1985) argues this has caused an increase in state control and created a supplement to prison. The introduction of community based punished increased the states control through more laws and punishment methods being developed. New organisations and agencies were also developed to enforce and regulate offender’s behaviour. This has seen more control and discipline imposed on the community, with increased regulation areas. Private organisations have obtained control of community punishment mechanisms, which has caused the privatisation of social control (Cohen 1985). The use of community-based punishment is increasing and prison rates are not declining, therefore there has been an overall increase in state control. Many offenders are now exposed to both community alternative methods and prison, therefore community-based punishment has become a supplement rather than an alternative. Austin and Krisberg (1981) argue that the decarceration approach has caused more state control, creating new practices where none had existed previously. Thus, rather than

Andrew Scull, like Cohen is not in support of the use of community-based punishment and would argue that we should not make greater use of community based punishment. Scull (1977) argues that the use of community-based punishment represents neglect of deviants and agrees with Cohen that the introduction of community-based punishment has created an alternative to institutionalisation, extended social services and caused an expansion of offenders. Cohen and Scull are both very critical of institutional based punishment and community-based punishment methods. McMahon argues that Cohen has adopted Martinsons (1974) conclusion that ‘nothing works’ in penal control. Roger Matthews (1987, p.351-352) also agrees that Cohen has a ‘nothing works’ approach towards penal control. Cohen was critical of the use of prison, suggesting that we needed to create an alternative and now he is very critical of the alternative that he wanted to be implemented. However, Cohen (1987) has recognised that previously the critique was on imprisonment and finding an alternative to prison, but now the critique is focused on the alternative punishment. Cohen (1987 p.396) is aware that he formerly argued for the abolishment of prison and greater use of community punishment methods, but now has come to see that this has also been ineffective. McMahon strongly