Redemption or forfeiture? Understanding diversity in Australians’ attitudes to parole

Recent Australian reforms to parole following high-profile violations are premised on a purported public desire for greater restrictions on the use of parole. These changes reflect the tendency of legislatures to presume that the public is largely punitive and invoke a ‘forfeiture’ of rights rationa...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Fitzgerald, Robin (Autor)
Otros Autores: Bartels, Lorana ; Freiberg, Arie
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: 2020
En: Criminology & criminal justice
Año: 2020, Volumen: 20, Número: 2, Páginas: 169-186
Acceso en línea: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Journals Online & Print:
Gargar...
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Palabras clave:
Descripción
Sumario:Recent Australian reforms to parole following high-profile violations are premised on a purported public desire for greater restrictions on the use of parole. These changes reflect the tendency of legislatures to presume that the public is largely punitive and invoke a ‘forfeiture’ of rights rationale that weakens support for offender rehabilitation. We consider whether restricting parole is based on a sound reading of public views. Drawing on a national study of public opinion on parole in Australia, we use a latent variable approach to look for distinct patterns in attitudes to parole and re-entry. We also examine what factors explain these patterns. The results support the conclusion that appealing to a public belief in offenders’ ability to change may be the most effective way to increase public confidence in parole systems.
ISSN:1748-8966
DOI:10.1177/1748895818800738