A Review of [The Crime of Punishment] by Karl Menninger, whose basic thesis is that psychiatry has more functional value within the criminological system than has been hitherto realized. Menninger's suggested reforms for our system include (1) trials which determine the facts of a crime; (2) sentences of indeterminate character, to be decided by penologists on the basis of each prisoner's reaction to treatment; (3) diagnostic centers for the criminally inclined; (4) industrial schools for delinquent minors; and (5) greatly extended pre-release and post-release programs. The reviewer regrets lack of expansion of these proposals and also finds inconsistent Menninger's support of automatic, predetermined penalties with his appeal for more selective treatment of prisoners. He also questions whether granting greater autonomy to psychiatrists in treating prisoners will necessarily better the system. Despite these reservations, the author feels this book may eventually be a "classic in its field."
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Paper series. The paper was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.