This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Karp, D. R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

The Judicial and Judicious Use of Shame Penalties

This article analyzes and critiques the recent use of judicial shame penalties. Arguing that these penalties are designed to satisfy a "retributive impulse," they communicate and enforce normative, as opposed to legal, standards. The power of the sanction is found in the threat of social exclusion. Three classes of shame penalties are identified: public exposure, debasement, and apology penalties. Critique of the penalties focuses on the risk of stigmatization and exclusion, the structural preconditions for offender reintegration, and the potentiality of using shame sanctions in an individualistic society.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				X. Chen Social Control in China: Applications of the Labeling Theory and the Reintegrative Shaming Theory Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol, February 1, 2002; 46(1): 45 - 63. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Levrant, F. T. Cullen, B. Fulton, and J. F. Wozniak Reconsidering Restorative Justice: The Corruption of Benevolence Revisited? Crime Delinquency, January 1, 1999; 45(1): 3 - 27. [Abstract] [PDF]