Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Stohr, M. K., Hemmens, C., Kifer, M., & Schoeler, M. (2000). We know it, we just have to do it:Perceptions of ethical work in prisons and jails. The Prison Journal, 80(2), 126-150. 

Determining what the appropriate behavior is in any given circumstance is not always clear in corrections work, given the nature of the tasks, the composition of the clientele, and the structure of the organization. In an effort to determine what correctional staff regarded as ethical behavior, the authors developed and administered a questionnaire to correctional staff in several prisons and jails in a western state. In this article, the authors report their findings from the effort to quantify the degree to which staff agree and disagree in their perceptions of ethical choices. They found that jail and prison staffs are more likely than not to perceive their work from an ethical perspective. The findings also indicate that although both types of facilities were in the top range of possible responses on the ethics summary variable, the jail staff were more likely to score higher. Finally, age increased the likelihood that a respondent had a higher ethical rating in jails, and being female increased such a score in prisons.

Questions that apply to this article:

1. What do the authors claim that the existing criminal justice ethics literature concentrates primarily on at this time?
2. What findings did the authors report on their effort to quantify the degree to which staff agree and disagree in their perceptions of ethical choices?
3.  Who scored higher on the ethics summary variable?  Why might this be important?

***

Reisig, M. D. & Pratt, T. C. (2000). The ethics of correctional privatization: A critical examination of the delegation of coercive authority. The Prison Journal, 80(2), 210-222. 

Privatization in the correctional setting takes many forms. This article focuses on an extreme variant of correctional privatization—privately owned and operated facilities—and critically examines the philosophical argument used to legitimate the practice. Among the more problematic features identified include a reliance on an interpretation of liberal theory that muddles the distinction between rights and authority, and confusion regarding the libertarian conceptions of the ultraminimal and minimal state. As a result, the attempt to justify the delegation of coercive authority from the state to private agencies is questioned. The authors attempt to advance ongoing debate by discussing one method for identifying what privatization alternatives are consistent with liberal theory’s conceptions of the individual and the state’s authority to punish.

Questions that apply to this article:

1. How do the author’s attempt to examine the ethnical question of whether or not the government should delegate coercive authority to private entities?
2. According to Hobbes and Rawls, where does society’s authority to use coercive force (punishment) come from?
3. Ultimately, what do the author’s decide in regards to the question of how much, if any, coercive authority the government should delegate to private entities?

***

Iannacchione, B., Collins, P. A., Hudson, M., Stohr, M. K., Hemmens, C., Thayer, J., & Brady, K. (2015). Ethics in a mountain state county jail. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 26(6), 555-574.

This research was conducted to identify and explain factors that shape staff and inmate perceptions of ethical behavior within a correctional setting. Prior research has found that staff do perceive high levels of deviance among their peers, but this varies by both the facility (jails were perceived as more unethical) and staff characteristics, with female and older staff perceiving their workplace as more ethical. The current research attempts to expand this line of study by surveying both inmates and staff on their perceptions of staff ethics within a jail in a mountain state jail. This research first examines what the general perceptions are among these two populations in regard to staff ethics. Second, it answers the question of whether perceived differences exist and how they vary between staff and inmates in regard to staff ethical behavior.

Questions that apply to this article:

1. Discuss two of the main differences found by the authors between staff and inmates when examining ethics in the jail setting?
2. Discuss the most important ethical issue found among the staff.
3. Discuss the most important ethical issue found among the inmates.

***

Breed, A. F. (1998). Corrections: A victim of situational ethics. Crime & Delinquency, 44(1), 9-18.

Corrections has always been the stepchild of the justice family, never having its role clearly defined, the resources to carry out its multitudinous functions, or a constituency to support its efforts. Over the years, corrections' history has been a series of ideals and errors operated within an extremely diverse amalgam of facilities, theories, techniques, and programs. For every reform period there has followed an absence of strong leadership to maintain progress made, a return to more punitive approaches, and a failure to gain public understanding and support in the development of humane, safe, and effective programs. Little progress has been made in relating correctional programs to the prevention of recidivism-the commission of further offenses-and perhaps even less progress has been made in the establishment of public policy in corrections based on principles that must inherently be a part of a democratic society.

Questions that apply to this article:

1. What about corrections makes the field clash with situations of ethical concern?
2. How did the Courts moving away from the hands off doctrine impact ethical issues in corrections?