Discuss the rationale behind the modern version of sentences aimed at shaming and whether they are effective.

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Answers may vary.The modern version of shaming allows low-level offenders-shoplifters, trespassers, and traffic code violators-to avoid all or part of a jail sentence by publicly renouncing their crimes in a humiliating way. The impetus for these alternative sentences is twofold. First, judges have become frustrated with revolving-door justice: a large number of offenders who are released from prison eventually return, suggesting that their punishments had little long-term effectiveness. Second, judges are aware of the longstanding problem of prison overcrowding and the high costs of incarceration. The American Bar Association has urged judges to provide alternatives to incarceration for offenders who might benefit from them. Some judges have been happy to oblige, and some of the sentences they have imposed are truly ingenious.Sentences like these are highly controversial. Some lawyers-defense attorneys and prosecutors alike-applaud them, acknowledging that judges have discretion in sentencing and that incarceration is costly and does not always work. But others worry that the shaming inherent in these sentences is extreme and morally repugnant. Even Dan Kahan, the early proponent of shaming penalties, now shuns them. He asserts that ordinary citizens prefer punishments that affirm, rather than denigrate, their core egalitarian values.Some recent research suggests that shaming may be effective, though, at least up to a point. The impetus for the study came from a 2004 law mandating that certain DUI offenders in Ohio be issued bright yellow license plates with red lettering and a serial number readily identifiable by law enforcement. Did the restricted license plate punishment have an effect on drinking and driving behaviors? The answer is a qualified yes: there were fewer license suspensions as the "saturation" of restricted plates (that is, the percentage of all plates that were restricted) slowly increased. But the effect leveled off and actually reversed when saturation reached a certain point. This suggests that the shaming aspect of the penalty may have some deterrent function because of its novelty. But when the novelty wears off, so does the penalty's effectiveness at changing behavior.