
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


There is a seductive appeal in the modern fashion of creative sentencing. It arrives clothed in empathy, wrapped in good intentions, and marketed as enlightened justice. Community service instead of incarceration. Training programs instead of fines. Public apologies instead of prison time. In cases involving safety-related failures—where negligence, recklessness, or willful disregard leads to serious harm or death—creative or alternative sentencing is increasingly advanced as humane, forward-thinking, and constructive. It is anything but. When used as a substitute rather than a supplement to punishment, creative sentencing is morally and ethically irresponsible. It fails the victim, undermines justice, corrodes deterrence, and ultimately erodes the moral architecture upon which safety itself depends.
By Brent JankeThere is a seductive appeal in the modern fashion of creative sentencing. It arrives clothed in empathy, wrapped in good intentions, and marketed as enlightened justice. Community service instead of incarceration. Training programs instead of fines. Public apologies instead of prison time. In cases involving safety-related failures—where negligence, recklessness, or willful disregard leads to serious harm or death—creative or alternative sentencing is increasingly advanced as humane, forward-thinking, and constructive. It is anything but. When used as a substitute rather than a supplement to punishment, creative sentencing is morally and ethically irresponsible. It fails the victim, undermines justice, corrodes deterrence, and ultimately erodes the moral architecture upon which safety itself depends.