Abstract
This paper reviews various uses of the concept of ‘punishment’ in relation to non-custodial sentences, including the frequently-made comparison between ‘punishment’ and ‘rehabilitation’. It concludes that ‘punishment’ has no stable meaning in respect of such sentences and, when utilised, often results in non-custodial penalties being found wanting by comparison with imprisonment. It is suggested that all sentences should be regarded as ‘punishments’, and that the creative development of community penalties will best be achieved by working with a threefold conceptualisation of reparation, rehabilitation and incapacitation, set within appropriate boundaries of proportionality.
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Professor Sir Anthony E. Bottoms is Wolfson Professor of Criminology Emeritus and Director of the Centre for Penal Theory and Penal Ethics, Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge. E-mail: aeb11@cam.ac.uk
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bottoms, A.E. ‘Punishment’ in Non-custodial Sentences: A Critical Analysis. Crim Law Forum 28, 563–587 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609-017-9325-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609-017-9325-8