In the traditional correctional system, imprisonment and probation have proven to be ineffective and costly. Prisons have maintenance costs and pay for the court appeals by the defendants who cannot support their cases. After a probation period, most criminals end up in trouble again; many of them find their way back to probation which in turn costs more. However, Intermediate Sanctions have proven to be more effective and less costly.
Intermediate sanctions are in the middle of the two extremes—namely Incarceration and Probation. It has a rigorous process of selecting which agencies should administer the system and which criminals deserve such sanctions. Whichever the case, intermediate sanctions still prove to be more effective than probation. Certain programs are applied for the criminal to follow, which also depends on the nature or gravity of crime committed.
The probation level is intensified and is reduced or increased, depending on their performance and development under the sentence. It also reduces the negatives brought about by prisons; overcrowding, maintenance costs, and psychological effects towards the prisoner’s family. Since intermediate sanctions aim to reform the prisoner, he or she can receive a shorter period in prison or a possible early parole, which in turn reduces crowding, costs, and the negative effects toward the prisoner’s family.
Some problems have risen concerning intermediate sanctions. However, these sanctions have proven to be an efficient way in handling criminals, reforming them in order for society to accept them once again. The rate of reformed criminals is also higher compared to the traditional systems, which proves the effectives of intermediate sanctions.