The ethics of correctional privatization: A critical examination of the delegation of coercive authority

Michael Reisig, Travis C. Pratt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Privatization in the correctional setting takes many forms. This article focuses on an extreme variant of correctional privatization-privately owned and operated facilities-and critically examines the philosophical argument used to legitimate the practice. Among the more problematic features identified include a reliance on an interpretation of liberal theory that muddles the distinction between rights and authority, and confusion regarding the libertarian conceptions of the ultraminimal and minimal state. As a result, the attempt to justify the delegation of coercive authority from the state to private agencies is questioned. The authors attempt to advance ongoing debate by discussing one method for identifying what privatization alternatives are consistent with liberal theory's conceptions of the individual and the state's authority to punish.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)210-222
Number of pages13
JournalPrison Journal
Volume82
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

privatization
moral philosophy
examination
state authority
interpretation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Law

Cite this

The ethics of correctional privatization : A critical examination of the delegation of coercive authority. / Reisig, Michael; Pratt, Travis C.

In: Prison Journal, Vol. 82, No. 4, 12.2002, p. 210-222.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ccf0d3e2dbde4e7b9f7b2f824715ac6d,
title = "The ethics of correctional privatization: A critical examination of the delegation of coercive authority",
abstract = "Privatization in the correctional setting takes many forms. This article focuses on an extreme variant of correctional privatization-privately owned and operated facilities-and critically examines the philosophical argument used to legitimate the practice. Among the more problematic features identified include a reliance on an interpretation of liberal theory that muddles the distinction between rights and authority, and confusion regarding the libertarian conceptions of the ultraminimal and minimal state. As a result, the attempt to justify the delegation of coercive authority from the state to private agencies is questioned. The authors attempt to advance ongoing debate by discussing one method for identifying what privatization alternatives are consistent with liberal theory's conceptions of the individual and the state's authority to punish.",
author = "Michael Reisig and Pratt, {Travis C.}",
year = "2002",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1177/0032885500080002005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "82",
pages = "210--222",
journal = "Prison Journal",
issn = "0032-8855",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The ethics of correctional privatization

T2 - A critical examination of the delegation of coercive authority

AU - Reisig, Michael

AU - Pratt, Travis C.

PY - 2002/12

Y1 - 2002/12

N2 - Privatization in the correctional setting takes many forms. This article focuses on an extreme variant of correctional privatization-privately owned and operated facilities-and critically examines the philosophical argument used to legitimate the practice. Among the more problematic features identified include a reliance on an interpretation of liberal theory that muddles the distinction between rights and authority, and confusion regarding the libertarian conceptions of the ultraminimal and minimal state. As a result, the attempt to justify the delegation of coercive authority from the state to private agencies is questioned. The authors attempt to advance ongoing debate by discussing one method for identifying what privatization alternatives are consistent with liberal theory's conceptions of the individual and the state's authority to punish.

AB - Privatization in the correctional setting takes many forms. This article focuses on an extreme variant of correctional privatization-privately owned and operated facilities-and critically examines the philosophical argument used to legitimate the practice. Among the more problematic features identified include a reliance on an interpretation of liberal theory that muddles the distinction between rights and authority, and confusion regarding the libertarian conceptions of the ultraminimal and minimal state. As a result, the attempt to justify the delegation of coercive authority from the state to private agencies is questioned. The authors attempt to advance ongoing debate by discussing one method for identifying what privatization alternatives are consistent with liberal theory's conceptions of the individual and the state's authority to punish.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=81255188111&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=81255188111&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0032885500080002005

DO - 10.1177/0032885500080002005

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:10844296516

VL - 82

SP - 210

EP - 222

JO - Prison Journal

JF - Prison Journal

SN - 0032-8855

IS - 4

ER -