Forsberg Lisa, Douglas Thomas
British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow, Faculty of Law, University of Oxford, St Cross Building, St Cross Road, Oxford, OX1 3UL UK.
Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford, Suite 8, Littlegate House, 16/17 St. Ebbe's St., Oxford, OX1 1PT UK.
Crim Law Philos. 2022;16(1):103-126. doi: 10.1007/s11572-020-09547-4. Epub 2020 Oct 3.
It is often said that the institutions of criminal justice ought or-perhaps more often-ought not to criminal offenders. But the term 'criminal rehabilitation' is often used without being explicitly defined, and in ways that are consistent with widely divergent conceptions. In this paper, we present a taxonomy that distinguishes, and explains the relationships between, different conceptions of criminal rehabilitation. Our taxonomy distinguishes conceptions of criminal rehabilitation on the basis of (i) the aims or ends of the putatively rehabilitative measure, and (ii) the means that may be used to achieve the intended end. We also explore some of the implications of each conception, some of the payoffs of a taxonomy of the kind we offer, and some areas for future work.
人们常说，刑事司法机构应该——或者更常见的是，不应该——惩罚罪犯。但是，“罪犯改造”这个术语经常被使用，却没有明确的定义，而且其使用方式与广泛不同的概念相一致。在本文中，我们提出了一种分类法，区分并解释了不同的罪犯改造概念之间的关系。我们的分类法基于以下两点来区分罪犯改造的概念：（i）假定的改造措施的目的或目标，以及（ii）可用于实现预期目标的手段。我们还探讨了每种概念的一些含义、我们提供的这种分类法的一些益处，以及未来工作的一些领域。
