Premium
THE TWELVE PEOPLE WHO SAVED REHABILITATION: HOW THE SCIENCE OF CRIMINOLOGY MADE A DIFFERENCE
Author(s) -
CULLEN FRANCIS T.
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
criminology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.467
H-Index - 139
eISSN - 1745-9125
pISSN - 0011-1384
DOI - 10.1111/j.0011-1348.2005.00001.x
Subject(s) - nothing , punitive damages , recidivism , rehabilitation , criminology , ideology , psychological intervention , intervention (counseling) , sociology , psychology , political science , law , politics , psychiatry , epistemology , philosophy , neuroscience
Three decades ago, it was widely believed by criminologists and policymakers that “nothing works” to reform offenders and that “rehabilitation is dead” as a guiding correctional philosophy. By contrast, today there is a vibrant movement to reaffirm rehabilitation and to implement programs based on the principles of effective intervention. How did this happen? I contend that the saving of rehabilitation was a contingent reality that emerged due to the efforts of a small group of loosely coupled research criminologists. These scholars rejected the “nothing works” professional ideology and instead used rigorous science to show that popular punitive interventions were ineffective, that offenders were not beyond redemption, and that treatment programs rooted in criminological knowledge were capable of meaningfully reducing recidivism. Their story is a reminder that, under certain conditions, the science of criminology is capable of making an important difference in the correctional enterprise, if not far beyond.