Intermediate sanctions were developed to fill the gap between regular probation and incarceration. How well do the intermediate sanctions developed thus far meet this need? Why or why not? Which sanction do you think has been the most effective? Why?

 

It has been found that intermediate sanctions are effective to a degree. However, the recidivism rates with these sanctions still remain higher than those who were subjected to jail time. The sanctions developed thus far have a great foundation but they still lack the rehabilitative need that many offenders have due to mental disorders, substance abuse and other issues that led them down the path of crime to begin with. Due to this, more measures need to be taken to help these intermediate sanctions be more effective. One of the most effective sanctions that have been used is the intensive supervision program. This is a parole program that has more control over the parolee by being more intensive in their home check-ins as well as the lack of privacy that the individual has compared to traditional parole. ISP allows for an offender to still be incapacitated to a degree, without being incarcerated, so their actions can be monitored and controlled as much as possible to prevent them from committing crimes. This control allows for a sense of punishment and is often followed through with strict requirements for rehab or mental health treatments to help prevent the chance of recidivism.