In the articles “Condemn the Crime. Not the Person” by June Tangney and “Shame is Worth a Try” by Dan Kahan the writers discuss options to incarceration to non-violent offenses. In Kahan’s article he introduces the option called “Shame Sentencing” ( 574 ) and June Tangney introduces the option to captivity and dishonoring with a future productive “Guilt Sentencing. ” ( 568 ) In their articles Tangney and Kahan both have valid points sing the usage of shame condemning as an option to imprisonment ; Tangney argues that “shaming” is incorrect and offers a good option in community service. whereas Kahan hardly comes to a decision that shame “is worth a try” . ( Kahan 574 )
Throughout Tangney’s article she expresses that she is really against the option to imprisonment used today. shame condemning. She does nevertheless in her article offer a replacement to dishonor condemning called guilt sentencing. Guilt condemning. for illustration. is doing the wrongdoer go to a rummy drive clang site to assist clean up if convicted of a DUI. With this method the populace at big and the province salvage money while salvaging scare prison infinite ; besides the offender’s shutting idea is that they did a bad thing. non that they are a bad individual. ( 568 ) Unlike dishonoring that is scientifically proved that it. “serves to intensify the really destructive forms of behaviour we aim to control. ” ( Tangney 567 ) What Tangney means by this is that shame sentencing may be inexpensive. but it isn’t every bit effectual as it is hyped to be. With shame condemning your name and your offense is put out in your local newspaper. which is supposed to make the consequence of guilt and compunction ; but this type of condemning really ends up making violent or reoccurring jobs with child or major offenses. Tangney besides explains throughout her article that. “feelings of guilt are much more likely to further constructive alterations in future behaviours. ” ( 568 ) Tangney exclaims that this is because guilt sentencing. “gives a sense that. I did a bad thing instead than I am a bad individual. ” ( 567 )
Through that method a individual can model their head to believe that they merely messed up and made a bad determination. non that they are a bad individual. Therefore they can retrieve from this action and be an extraordinary benefit for society in the hereafter. Tangney besides truly hits difficult on the fact that. “any honest community service voluntary would welcome such constructive alterations. ” ( 569 ) This point truly grabs the society as a whole that a individual may hold done a bad thing. but is non a bad individual. which is an highly of import measure in the rehabilitation procedure. In the terminal if you are honest community service voluntary you will give some of your comfortableness to allow a individual go a greater property to society. This can be achieved through guilt condemning alternatively of a non-beneficial expression the other manner. shame condemning. Kahan’s article is rather wide and absurd in the fact that he is merely concentrating on that shame sentencing is cheaper than captivity and frees up nonexistent prison infinite. Even so. Kahan ne’er makes the point or shows that he has done any scientific research to see if his “Shame Sentencing” ( Kahan 575 ) is really good to the wrongdoer or that he has looked anyplace to happen options to dishonor condemning itself.
Kahan’s statement that goes along with this is. “Shame is inexpensive and effectual and frees up scarce prison infinite for more serious offenses. ” ( 576 ) Our authorities. our legislative assembly system is neglecting the full society with shame condemning. Judges. legislative assembly. and the populace are all turning a blind oculus to the fact that if shaming happened to them that it would be mortifying. These groups of people ne’er look past the initial feeling to see that it would do a batch of people angrier or have a sense of. that’s all I get for making that offense that I was supposed to travel to prison for? No clip was taking out of their twenty-four hours. no lesson was learned. merely a few glairs from neighbours and possibly an employer. That is a atrocious outlook to put for an wrongdoer. and non to advert that our Judges. legislative assembly. and the populace at big. accepts this as an all right penalty. Shaming is doing some people ferocious and yet for some it is non ferocious plenty. ( Kahan 575 ) Kahan does nevertheless province that. “Shame clearly doesn’t injury every bit much as imprisonment” ( 575 ) Although. if all we are disquieted about is the wounded factor of imprisonment. so why set so much revenue enhancement money into prison installations to do them rehabilitation centres ; because we are focused on doing this individual better for society.
That ground entirely is why. unlike Kahan. we need to look for a solution. such as Tangney did. Between these two articles one writer stated that shame sentencing is “cheap and effective” ( Kahan 575 ) yet he gives no grounds of scientific research to endorse up that shame condemning truly is effectual. The other writer. Tangney. really backs up and states the fact that shame sentencing is non deserving a attempt. However she gives a valuable option that is still merely as cheap and non merely helps society out but makes that individual a greater good to society. This alternate as we learned was. guilt sentencing: this condemning creates the feeling and or consequence. that the wrongdoer did a bad thing. non that they are a bad individual. ( Tangney 568 ) But guilt sentencing does non halt at that place for the greater good. Scientific research backs up guilt condemning with saying that. “feelings of guilt are much more likely to further constructive alterations in future behaviour. ” ( Tangney 568 ) As a whole community we need to halt being so inexpensive and really adopted a method that is highly good to person who did merely steal up. This individual of our countrywide community needs aid to acquire back on the right way without traveling through the utmost cost and mental destructiveness of captivity. Guilt sentencing has been more supported by scientific research. than shame condemning. and it helps a individual go a benefit to the countrywide society through community service. instead than acquiring a name printed in the paper and merely being “worth a attempt. ” ( Kahan 576 )
Kahan. Dan. “Shame Is Worth a Try” Models for Writers: Short Essays for Composition Eleventh Edition. Eds. Alfred Rosa and Paul Eschholz Boston: Bedford St. Martin’s. 2011. 574-576. Print. Tangney. June. “Condemn the Crime. Not the Person” Models for Writers: Short Essays for Composition Eleventh Edition. Eds. Alfred Rosa and Paul Eschholz Boston: Bedford St. Martin’s. 2011. 564-568. Print.