From Decarceration to E-Carceration
From Decarceration to E-Carceration
复制标题
从监禁到电子监禁
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
C. Arnett
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Arnett
每年，数百万美国人通过电子脚镣接受刑事司法监管。这些设备从根本上改变了我们对监禁、惩罚以及监禁国家范围的理解，因为它们越来越多地被作为适度的刑事制裁以及解决大规模监禁问题的可行方案。据称它们能够实现去监禁化，尽管是以加强社区监管作为妥协。这些设备的支持者宣扬其对公共安全的益处以及成本优势，同时强调减少监狱人口并让个人回归社区的重要性。近年来，一场反对运动兴起，重点在于强调电子监控作为新兴电子监禁制度一部分所带来的社会危害，在这种制度下，数字监狱并非作为实体建筑的替代品出现，而是作为一种扩大范围的矫正策略协同运作。本文运用社会边缘化框架审视这场关于电子脚镣有效性的争论。文章认为，当前关于电子脚镣使用的学术争论存在局限性，因为它没有考虑到社会边缘化的潜在危害，尤其是对于受到这种监控形式的历史上处于从属地位的群体。它运用制度规避理论来阐明这样一种观点：高强度的刑事司法监控会产生适得其反的效果，导致受到监控的人规避对充分重新融入社会和减少累犯至关重要的机构。它提出一种关于监禁国家具有可塑性的理论，即其范围超越监狱围墙，扩展了我们的监禁现实，并对隐私、自由和民主参与造成巨大压力。最终，文章强调从去监禁化到电子监禁化，或者从大规模监禁到大规模监控的转变，很可能无法解决，甚至可能加剧大规模监禁的最大危害之一：社会阶层的固化。因此，要充分应对这一挑战，需要对刑事司法改革采取一种更有力和变革性的方法，将惩罚性框架转变为侧重于已被证明的增加被告和前科犯与社区和公民生活联系的方法的康复性框架，比如就业援助计划、技术和创业技能培养、保障性住房选择以及心理健康服务。
Each year, millions of Americans experience criminal justice surveillance through electronic ankle monitors. These devices have fundamentally altered our understanding of incarceration, punishment, and the extent of the carceral state, as they are increasingly offered as moderate penal sanctions and viable solutions to the problem of mass incarceration. They purportedly enable decarceration, albeit with enhanced surveillance in the community as the compromise. Proponents of the devices tout the public safety and cost benefits while stressing the importance of depopulating prisons and returning individuals to their communities. In recent years, an oppositional movement has developed, focused on highlighting the social harms of electronic monitoring as part of a burgeoning e-carceration regime, where digital prisons arise, not as substitutes to brick and mortar buildings, but as net-widening correctional strategy operationalized to work in tandem. This Paper examines this debate on the effectiveness of electronic ankle monitors using a social marginalization framework. It argues that the current scholarly debate on the use of electronic ankle monitors is limited because it fails to consider the potential harm of social marginalization, particularly for historically subordinated groups subjected to this form of surveillance. It uses system avoidance theory to elucidate the argument that intensive criminal justice surveillance has the counterproductive effect of causing those subjected to surveillance to avoid institutions necessary for adequate reintegration and reduction in recidivism. It offers a theory of the carceral state as malleable, extending beyond prison walls, expanding our carceral reality, and placing great strains on privacy, liberty, and democratic participation. Ultimately, it stresses that a move from decarceration to e-carceration, or from mass incarceration to mass surveillance, will likely fail to resolve, and may exacerbate, one of the greatest harms of mass incarceration: the maintenance of social stratification. Thus, adequately addressing this challenge will demand a more robust and transformative approach to criminal justice reform that shifts a punitive framework to a rehabilitative one focused on proven methods of increasing defendants’ and former offenders’ connections to their community and civic life, such as employment assistance programming, technical and entrepreneurial skill development, supportive housing options, and mental health services.