{"title":"废除刑罚的耻辱","authors":"Andrew Henley","doi":"10.1080/09627251.2015.1143653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Benthamite workhouse principle of ‘less eligibility’ dates back to the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 and, since its application to the sphere of criminal justice, has long dictated that prisoners and other lawbreakers should always be last in the queue for access to scant welfare resources because of the moral censure attached to their behaviour. This continues to be problematic for those advocating penal reform with debates about imprisonment often descending into objections to any material improvement in conditions on the basis that they would be unfair to ‘hard-working taxpayers’ or the supposedly ‘law-abiding majority’. An allied but lesser known principle is that of ‘non-superiority’ which Mannheim (1939) described as ‘the requirement that the condition of the criminal when he has paid the penalty for his crime should be at least not superior to that of the lowest classes of the non-criminal population’.","PeriodicalId":432339,"journal":{"name":"Criminal Justice Matters","volume":"100 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Abolishing the stigma of punishments served\",\"authors\":\"Andrew Henley\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09627251.2015.1143653\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Benthamite workhouse principle of ‘less eligibility’ dates back to the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 and, since its application to the sphere of criminal justice, has long dictated that prisoners and other lawbreakers should always be last in the queue for access to scant welfare resources because of the moral censure attached to their behaviour. This continues to be problematic for those advocating penal reform with debates about imprisonment often descending into objections to any material improvement in conditions on the basis that they would be unfair to ‘hard-working taxpayers’ or the supposedly ‘law-abiding majority’. An allied but lesser known principle is that of ‘non-superiority’ which Mannheim (1939) described as ‘the requirement that the condition of the criminal when he has paid the penalty for his crime should be at least not superior to that of the lowest classes of the non-criminal population’.\",\"PeriodicalId\":432339,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Criminal Justice Matters\",\"volume\":\"100 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Criminal Justice Matters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09627251.2015.1143653\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminal Justice Matters","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09627251.2015.1143653","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
摘要
Benthamite济贫院的“更少资格”原则可以追溯到1834年的《济贫法修正案》(Poor Law Amendment Act),自从它被应用于刑事司法领域以来,一直规定囚犯和其他违法者应该永远排在获得稀缺福利资源的最后,因为他们的行为会受到道德谴责。对于那些提倡刑法改革的人来说,这仍然是一个问题,因为关于监禁的辩论往往会沦为反对任何物质条件改善的理由,因为这对“辛勤工作的纳税人”或所谓的“守法的大多数”是不公平的。一个与之相关但鲜为人知的原则是“非优越性”,曼海姆(1939)将其描述为“要求罪犯在为其罪行付出代价时的条件至少不应优于非犯罪人口中最低阶层的条件”。
The Benthamite workhouse principle of ‘less eligibility’ dates back to the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 and, since its application to the sphere of criminal justice, has long dictated that prisoners and other lawbreakers should always be last in the queue for access to scant welfare resources because of the moral censure attached to their behaviour. This continues to be problematic for those advocating penal reform with debates about imprisonment often descending into objections to any material improvement in conditions on the basis that they would be unfair to ‘hard-working taxpayers’ or the supposedly ‘law-abiding majority’. An allied but lesser known principle is that of ‘non-superiority’ which Mannheim (1939) described as ‘the requirement that the condition of the criminal when he has paid the penalty for his crime should be at least not superior to that of the lowest classes of the non-criminal population’.