scholarly journals Can Therapeutic Jurisprudence Provide a Normative Link between Recent Trends in Criminal Law Theory and Criminal Justice Practices?

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise K. M. Kennefick
2021 ◽  
pp. 096466392110208
Author(s):  
Riikka Kotanen

In the context of home, violence remains more accepted when committed against children than adults. Normalisation of parental violence has been documented in attitudinal surveys, professional practices, and legal regulation. For example, in many countries violent disciplining of children is the only legal form of interpersonal violence. This study explores the societal invisibility and normalisation of parental violence as a crime by analysing legislation and control policies regulating the division of labour and involvement between social welfare and criminal justice authorities. An empirical case study from Finland, where all forms of parental violence were legally prohibited in 1983, is used to elucidate the divergence between (criminal) law and control policies. The analysis demonstrates how normalisation operates at the policy-level where, within the same system of control that criminalised these acts, structural hindrances are built to prevent criminal justice interventions.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1037969X2098510
Author(s):  
Megan Beatrice

The upward trend of incarceration rates persists among women in Victoria, with increasingly punitive sentencing and onerous new bail laws. At the same time, the complex needs of women in the criminal justice system are becoming the focus of greater study and documentation. This article presents the case for a specialist women’s list under the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria jurisdiction, based in principles of therapeutic jurisprudence and procedural justice. While the list aims to reduce offending by addressing criminogenic factors unique to women, the picture is far bigger; the Victorian Women’s Court ultimately promotes justice for women who commit crimes.


2021 ◽  
pp. e20210014
Author(s):  
Vincent Chiao

In this article, I consider the degree to which criminal justice interventions may be expected to ameliorate systemic corruption. I distinguish between two ideal types of corrupt actors – conditional cooperators and autonomous defectors – and argue that the prospects of reform through criminal justice is greatly affected by the relative preponderance of each type. When conditional cooperators predominate, the criminal law serves primarily to provide assurance that a perceived social norm is effective, in that the norm is both widely adhered to, and adhered to because people endorse the propriety of that norm. When autonomous defectors predominate, the criminal law serves primarily to deter would-be cheaters by attaching costs, at least in expectation, to cheating. Because patterns of compliance based upon a social norm tend to be self-reinforcing, unlike patterns of compliance motivated by fear of sanction, I argue that the prospects of sustainable reform through criminal justice interventions is likely to depend to a substantial degree upon convincing people to trust social norms rather than rely upon their private judgments of what is in their interest – that is, to become conditional cooperators.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document