Afilliation:
There are three major considerations in discussing comparatively the difference between prisons and alternative sentencing which are the psychological and mental stress undergone by the individual, the philosophy and innate goal of prison and alternative sentencing and lastly the financial and human resource of the place.
A correctional facility can be, in principle, a description for both prison and alternative sentencing. A prison is traditionally a special building or structure built in order to isolate an individual from society and pave way to the reckoning of his/her mistakes. More than the isolation itself, a certain environment causes the individuals to experience a tormenting time all towards the goal of repentance and justice. Justice is also much served and the goal for alternative sentencing. The primary difference is that alternative sentencing offers a more lenient and understanding way to handle the guilty individual. Alternative sentencing may vary from electronic confinement to daily reporting and in some perspective relieves the person from the feeling of being totally isolated from the society (Massachusetts Court System, 2016). The environment undergone by an individual going through alternative sentencing is different in several ways from a person in prison. It is therefore a healthy research and discussion to know more about how prison and alternative sentencing functions as a form of a correctional process.
Prisons may have differences depending on which country or place it is in but they have the common denominator which is being a place people do not want. It is known that having gone to a sentence in prison is a huge stressful and depressing experience (Haney, 2001). This amount of torments towards an individual’s psychological stature is enough punishment for prisons to be tagged as hell on earth. Isolation and having to feel deprived of what social beings humans are naturally are key punishments in jail time. Alternative sentencing offers almost a complete turnaround in the idea of isolation done by prisons. Community based service and partial restrain and confinement allows an individual to pay for his/her dues while living the common life during alternative sentencing(Massachusetts Court System, 2016). It is by some perspective and line of thought that an individual who has done bad towards the society should do an equal amount of good while ensuring that he/she will also work his/her way in order to prevent such circumstance to ever happening again. With that said it may be just to say that the mental strain caused by alternative sentencing is much less than what prisons are doing. The difference on induced mental strain is critical in determining the effectiveness of the two methods (Forst, 2009). While having shown the dichotomy between the philosophies with regards to mental strain induced, it is also an effective way to show the unity of the two corrective facilities when it comes to shaping the attitude of the individual, both aims to develop an inclination to doing well or preventing the idea of doing bad.
A study by Farrow & Greiner (1996) enumerates a number of variables that differentiate prisons situated in the United States versus those in the United Kingdom. Most of the study suggests better prison conditions in the UK. Some example scenarios were the availability of more sophisticated indoor recreational facilities, medical facilities, larger areas for kitchen and associate stores, more opportunities for education, even farms and gardens. Taking these into consideration, it seems that UK prisons are much more humane compared to those in the US. The study also tackled cost analysis data in building the prison, prison security, and quality in the materials used. The study points out that UK prisons had better security by using reinforced concrete on all walls and perimeters as compared to US prisons’ use of blockwork and open mesh fences. It is key to note, however, that UK prisons almost spend twice the amount of money to build their prisons. Lastly, based on statistics, there are lesser prisoners in the UK amounting to around a 50 million population, or 0.1% of the UK population as of Farrow &Greiner’s study compared to around 250 million for the US, or 0.5% of its total population in the country; only 53% of UK prisoners were re-offenders compared to 80% in the US; and UK prisons has only 0.5 riots per year, versus the 22 riots per year in the US, or a rate of twice a month.
The financial capability of a country would greatly affect how prisons and alternative sentencing may be applicable. It is easier to conduct alternative sentencing to much capable countries like the USA and many European countries but consider countries like Philippines. Philippines is a Southeast Asian country with severe cases of poverty. Under this circumstance, Philippines could only afford imprisonment as the primary method of punishment for crimes. Although several outstanding individuals of wealthy upbringing could take to the court the preference for alternative sentencing, it is socially bounded. This dilemma is a loophole in the argument for better punishment. Some cases prioritize capability more than ease when it comes to method of punishment. More than the philosophical end that the prison and alternative sentencing aims to achieve, the financial aspects of a country take first seed.In line with the financial needs are the human resource that could have abundance or scarcity (Kirchhoff, 2010). A country with such a high population index like Philippines would rather prefer prisons which will also create job opportunities (Corrections, Prisons & Parole, 2016). These and the opposing fact for the alternative sentencing which would have financial capabilities and not more reliant on human resource will determine a great difference between the corrective facilities.
Prisons were not called correctional facilities for no reason; thus, prisons must uphold its name in developing an environment where change can occur, and not just punishment. This leans towards the statement that prisons can detach itself from traditional means of discipline, however, it cannot; and additional choices of sentencing may be incorporated in prison, but prison itself cannot be abandoned as a whole.
REFERENCES
Corrections, Prisons & Parole. (2016). Careers. Retrieved from http://www.corrections.vic.gov.au/utility/careers/
Farrow, N. T., & Greiner, C. A. (1996). Comparison of a UK & USA prison. Save International Conference Proceedings. Retrieved from http://www.value-eng.org/pdf_docs/conference_proceedings/1996/9610.PDF
Forst, M., J. Fagan, & T. Scott Vivona. (2009). Youth in prisons and training schools: perceptions and consequences of the treatment-custody dichotomy.DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-6988.1989.tb00634.x
Haney, C. (2001). The psychological impact of incarceration: implications for post-prison adjustment. Santa Cruz: University of California. Retrieved from https://aspe.hhs.gov/basic-report/psychological-impact-incarceration-implications-post-prison-adjustment
Kirchhoff, S. M. (2010). Economic impacts of prison growth. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved from https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41177.pdf
Massachusetts Court System. (2016). Alternative sentencing. Retrieved from http://www.mass.gov/courts/programs/adr/
