The Process of Ideological Change in Corrections: Some Nova Scotian Cases Herbert Gamberg Anthony Thomson Olga Scibior Report prepared for Health and Welfare, Canada, Non-Medical Use of Drugs Directorate, January 1978 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION CHAPTER ONE - Metaphysical, Classical and Positive Criminologies CHAPTER TWO - The Concept of Rehabilitation CHAPTER THREE - Liberal Criminology at the Service of the Prison Administration CHAPTER FOUR - Liberal and Radical Responses CHAPTER FIVE - The Development of Community Corrections CHAPTER SIX - Community Corrections and the Prison CHAPTER SEVEN - Rehabilitation and the Opportunities Principle CHAPTER EIGHT - Conclusion INTRODUCTION It has been said somewhere that to study one thing well is to study the whole world. This has certainly been the case in the present investigation where an analysis of one small attempted innovation in the field of corrections has led us not only to a comparison with other attempts at correctional innovation, but to the historical and sociological foundations of corrections in general. And this, we believe, is as it should be since no case study can be theoretically grasped without its situation in broader experience and broader theory. The research then was originally concerned to focus on what at the time had appeared to be a significant innovation in correctional practices in Nova Scotia. It was not the specific claims of success made both by the originators of the programme and its official sponsors which made it appear to be unique – such claims are commonplace on the part of interested parties – but rather the orientation to the problem of individual transformation in prison which the programme articulated. In the view of its originator, the programme was successful in curtailing drug abuse, in providing a deeper sense of individual fulfillment, in enhancing prisoner' social status and self-esteem, in encouraging attitudes of individual and social responsibility, and in assisting prisoners and -in becoming more socially productive. These claims placed the programme squarely within the modern tradition of rehabilitation. What had appeared at first to be an anomaly in the treatment field began increasingly to appear to be one manifestation of a particular emphasis in correctional philosophy. Nevertheless, the programme explicitly condemned the notion of rehabilitation for its failure to achieve the goals of individual transformation and asserted that programmes in the prison were intrinsically incapable of meeting the needs of prisoners. The rehabilitative ideal attempted to compensate for a presumed deficiency of individual characteristics which derived from a thesis of under-socialization; the innovative programme attempted to overcome the repression of the prison regime and liberate individual creativity and self-expression. It was necessary to examine the ideological foundation of the new programme as it related to the ideology of rehabilitation. The question of the basic ideology undergirding the programme involved two separate areas of enquiry: first there was the explicit rationale and logical means/ends connection which the programme explicitly espoused – its “official” ideology; and second, was the larger question of the implicit ideology underneath its pronouncements. We had to distinguish between the ex- planation of its practice which was consistent with its own view of the world and a sociological explanation which attempts to situate this world view both in relation to the development of ideological positions in corrections and to the concrete historical practices evolved by the programme itself. It became apparent that if the programme did indeed have some unique features, these would necessarily require explication through comparison and contrast with both the prevailing ideology (with which there was some discrepancy – in practice even more than theory) and the attempts to implement this dominant view within the prison. The most appropriate com- parison points would be those relatively innovative programmes which were developed at approximately the same time. The actual acceptance of these programmes as a whole was an; expression of the development within the rehabilitative philosophy of a trend to community corrections. In searching for the unique aspects of the programme with which the research had been concerned its conjunctural aspects had been ignored. This indicated the need to situate it within the context of the philosophy and practice of the correctional field overall. Furthermore, our initial study of the one programme revealed that in order to understand the phenomenon it was inappropriate to take a static ahistorical and non-developmental approach because just as the specific conjuncture changed over time, the programme itself exhibited an internal evolution which transformed it from the inside and which appeared to heighten the contradictions between the programme and its ideological environment. This internal/external dynamic was not merely specific to the one programme but was equally applicable to the many innovative developments which occurred during the period. In order to study the evolution of programmes over time it was necessary, first, to place them within their social context, isolate those general social trends upon which it arose and then study its development in relation to changes in these trends – changes which relate to the process of transformation in the social structure as a whole. The transition from a position of proportionately little interest in “rehabilitation” to one of relatively greater interest was connected to wider social forces which can best be explained using a socio-historical approach within a wider theoretical perspective, Arising in the middle and late 1960’s in response to a deepening social crisis, a general reorientation towards the social causes of individual problems emerged which was reflected in correctional ideology by a recognition of the social responsibility for crime and which emphasized the potential of resocialization. The social climate surrounding the “peace and security” debate in Canada marks a significant decline in the emphasis placed on rehabilitation. The reiteration of a more traditional punitive approach to criminal justice is related to wider social phenomena which are equally manifest in social service cutbacks and tighter government controls. The state exercises a monopoly over the legitimate means of coercion and the apparatus of coercion is a particularly sensitive weathervane with which to understand wider social forces. It is within this broad framework that we approach the question of ideological transformation in the criminal justice system and the place of innovative programmes within it. The optimism of reform within which the innovative programmes were devised was followed by a rapid disillusionment and a new orientation to social questions which had negative effects on the various programmes. The study of these phenomena took on several dimensions: it was important to study the programme as it corresponded to or deviated from the dominant ideology. The most important characteristic of the present period of social theory however, is the apparently great diversity of sociological paradigms all competing with each other. Out of this seeming diversity it emerged that the predominant orientations were not unique philosophical creations but on the contrary were new adaptations of old historical problems. Inquiring into ideological change must involve an attempt to come to grips with the origin- ation of social theory and its modification or supersession over time by new theory, the orientations of the present being based on an evaluative stance towards the past. The study of the process of ideological change in corrections is concerned with the inter-relationship of four processes: developments in social theory, orientation to social problems advanced by representatives of official institutions, implementation of programmes, and, underlying all three, salient aspects of the historical conjuncture, with each process exhibiting an internal dynamic as well as reacting to external developments. This monograph represents no more than an initial sketch of such a study. It has not been possible within the time 'frame of the research to even approximate a comprehensive study of correctional developments in Canada and their relation to theoretical positions and social practices which by and large have their origin outside of Canada. We approach the question of theory by briefly examining some developments.in the field of social problems and corrections devised in the United States and Britain, the most important foreign sources of Canadian conceptions, which we believe to be illustrative of generalized trends. The attempt is made to understand the development of theoretical positions not as disembodied ideas but in relation to social practices. Three separate levels of research are undertaken: general theory, national policy, and local practices. It would be incorrect to generalize from the local to the higher levels, and conclusions drawn about programmes in Nova Scotia need not be directly applicable to other regions. Nevertheless, the wider contexts do have an effect on programmes in Nova Scotia, and this must be taken into consideration. Secondly we examine the practical application of reform proposals within the framework of specifically dominant ideological models as official responses to perceived social problems within this general theoretical