UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The right of prisoners to education Bastion, Arlene 1987

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1987_A2 B37.pdf [ 6.3MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0055731.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0055731-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0055731-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0055731-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0055731-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0055731-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0055731-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0055731-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0055731.ris

Full Text

THE  RIGHT OF PRISONERS TO EDUCATION by ARLENE BASTION  B.A., U n i v e r s i t y Of M a l a y a ,  1973, M.Ed., U n i v e r s i t y Of M a l a y a , 1 976  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE  REQUIREMENTS  FOR THE DEGREE OF  DOCTOR OF EDUCATION in THE  FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES  Department Of S o c i a l  We a c c e p t to  THE  this  And E d u c a t i o n a l  t h e s i s as conforming  the required  standard  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH July  ©  Arlene  Studies  COLUMBIA  1987  Bastion,  1987  In  presenting  degree freely  at  this  the  available  copying  of  department publication  thesis  in  partial  fulfilment  University  of  British  Columbia,  for  this or of  reference  thesis by  this  for  his  and  scholarly  or  thesis  study.  her  for  I  of I  further  purposes  gain  requirements  agree  that  agree  may  be  It  is  representatives.  financial  the  shall  not  that  of  Social  The University of British 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date  DE-6(3/81)  August  14  and  Educational  Columbia  1987  Library  permission  granted  by  understood be  permission.  Department  the  Studies  for  allowed  the  an  advanced  shall for  make  extensive  head  that without  it  of  copying my  my or  written  i i  Abstract Punishment  i s an a c k n o w l e d g e d method o f e n f o r c i n g  Forms o f p u n i s h m e n t may d i f f e r , same—first, maintaining least,  to  discourage  order  that  main  transgression  in society.  prisoners  but the  Second,  will  be  aims of  the law.  remain  the  law,  thus  the  i t i s hoped, by  reformed  by  some  or d u r i n g  at  their  punishment. This legal of  d i s s e r t a t i o n raises questions  r i g h t s o f i n d i v i d u a l s who a r e s u b j e c t  punishment  prisoners during  in Canada—incarceration.  continue  bearings It while  one  gives  on t h e s t a t u s i s argued  that  incarcerated,  right  to education,  right.  from p r i s o n e r s .  certain  their  education Thus,  to  provide  persons  of p r i s o n e r s prisoners  fulfil  t o t h e dominant  form  i s warranted the f i r s t  right-holders  have a r i g h t t o legal  clearly  during  their  retain their  only  relevant  right?  has important  incarceration.  status  as  persons  punishment  not  offer/provide  legal  or  just  withholding  inflicted  on  adequate grounds f o r  access  i s that  for  being  Indeed,  to ensure t h e i r proposition  is  be made a  differences  justification  That  to protect  the c r i t e r i a  then,  such a r i g h t s h o u l d  acceptable  does  and  a r e : Can  t h e y do have r i g h t s , i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e  right to education.  necessary  and  s u c h a r i g h t be made a  J u s t i c e d i c t a t e s that  rights  rights  prisoners,  and t h a t  can  the  The q u e s t i o n s  t o these questions  that  cause  denying  Can  I f so, should  answer  status  t o be r e g a r d e d a s p e r s o n s  incarceration?  education? The  about  a  legal to  apart  to  education.  from  s o c i e t y and t h e p r i s o n ,  of p u n i s h m e n t , p r i s o n e r s  right  the l o s s of and i n o r d e r  continue  t o hold  rights  held  by  education. that  This  prisoners  legal  position  have a m o r a l  in  particular  i s d e f e n d e d by  Argument  from  2.  The  Argument  from The  3.  The  Argument  from Punishment  4.  The  Argument  from F r a t e r n a l  5.  The  Argument  from S o c i a l E f f e c t s  6.  The  Argument  from B e n e f i t s  7.  The  Argument  from  The  second p r o p o s i t i o n  achievement  of  the  goals  E f f e c t s of  2.  However, e d u c a t i o n  3.  As  i t now  sustain With  stands,  education a legal  for objecting  opportunities. ensure equal  in  A legal  arguments  These  are:  of  Punishment Persons  Obligation  to  that  this three  the C o l l e c t i v e  r i g h t ought  t o be  made  a  premises:  contribute  to  the  successful  incarceration. i s not there  considered  i s no  a  priority.  e f f e c t i v e way  to  enforce  prisons.  r i g h t to education, to  considering  to  Equality  can  of  right  Incarceration  r i g h t r e s t s e s s e n t i a l l y on education  the  r i g h t to education.  The  That  basis  persons,  1.  1.  and  other  prisoners  inadequate  educational  r i g h t would  safeguard  opportunities  to  education.  would have some facilities  fair  treatment  and and  i v  Table  of C o n t e n t s  Abstract Acknowledgement Chapter I INTRODUCTION  i i v 1  Chapter II PENITENTIARY EDUCATION IN CANADA  16  Chapter I I I BACKGROUND REVIEW OF RIGHTS  32  C h a p t e r IV THE RIGHT TO EDUCATION  81  Chapter V THE RIGHT OF PRISONERS TO EDUCATION  103  C h a p t e r VI CONCLUSION  129  BIBLIOGRAPHY  138  V  Acknowledgement  I wish and  to acknowledge  Educational  Staff  of  Stephen indebted Coombs,  Duguid  and  and  I wish  t o thank Ms.  C e n t r e . I am  a l s o g r a t e f u l to  L e r o i B. D a n i e l s ,  Professor inspiration, t o my  Murray and  f r i e n d s , my  and  Elliot,  faith  i n me.  heartfelt  l o v e . Many p e r s o n s h e l p e d p u l l  h a u l . They were t h e diamonds i n t h e  of  dark.  Social  Angela Runnals,  f o r h i s c o n s t r u c t i v e comments. I w i l l  to Professor  f a t h e r , and  support  Studies.  the Computing  encouragement, and  t h e a s s i s t a n c e of t h e D e p a r t m e n t  and  Professor always  to Professor for  their  And  to  my  be  Jerrold advice, mother  a p p r e c i a t i o n of  your  me  long  through t h i s  1  I. The  dissertation  INTRODUCTION  h a s two m a j o r  tasks.  presenting  arguments e s s e n t i a l l y moral  prisoners  have  at  least  argued  that  prisoners  Among  the  rights  rights  to education.  a  are persons.  held  by  of t a k i n g  dignity  a s p e r s o n s and t h e i r  The ought  to  components  While  believe  within  background  appropriate  regarding the  of  and  penitentiaries  prisoners  account  of  chapter  two.  the  certain  these  arguments  references  aspects  problems. here  be  are  against  practice.  will  or  prisoners'  offered  the  background It  to  outlines  a s p e r s o n s and r i g h t h o l d e r s ,  underlying should  the be  claim  made  three  contains  that  legal  p e n i t e n t i a r y education  Chapter  right  education  s e t my a r g u m e n t s  corrections  dissertation.  to education  demands  Where  made  t o the  Columbia.  outlines  the  that  I will  their  moral  Legislating  the  Canadian  this  prison-based  ameliorate  society,  available,  chapter of  that  in British  assumptions  rights  any  might  Rather,  in  education.  While  problematic.  argues  as p r i s o n e r s  whether  postulated  to education  I  plausible  arguments  is  are  opportunities  This  it  It i s  right-holders.  incarceration  r i g h t to  right.  why  i n our s o c i e t y a r e c e r t a i n  special status  discusses  made a l e g a l  exist,  Persons a r e  about  of a t l e a s t a moral  be  showing  r i g h t away from p r i s o n e r s .  d i s s e r t a t i o n then  programs  the  this  nature,  involves  right to education.  persons  Nothing  favour  recognition  moral  in  The f i r s t  a  the  two  main  the grounds f o r and  explicates  prisoners' rights.  system w i l l background  A  moral brief  be g i v e n i n review  of  2  rights, used In  while  to j u s t i f y chapter  f o u r e x a m i n e s some a r g u m e n t s w h i c h c a n be  the r i g h t  five,  specifically the  chapter  to education  arguments  f o r persons  to j u s t i f y  for prisoners are raised.  in  the r i g h t Chapter  general.  to education  six  concludes  dissertation. It  must  business  be  of  produced  that  the  establishing  dissertation according  noted  dissertation  empirical  i s exploratory i n nature.  a legal  right  to education  incontrovertible  ...there  arguments  i s not i n the  conclusions. It lays  without f o r such  The  the grounds f o r  purporting to  have  a policy:  i s a l s o a p l a c e and f u n c t i o n i n o u r intellectual  life  for a less  complete  work, c o n t a i n i n g u n f i n i s h e d p r e s e n t a t i o n s , open q u e s t i o n s and p r o b l e m s , . a s w e l l a s a main l i n e (Nozick,  1974, p. x i i )  PRISONERS AS PERSONS AND  RIGHTHOLDERS  The  rights  beings.  ability Feinberg  Nowheresville. unhappier 'what  is  than  to  to  claim  (1979) i m a g i n e s The  citizens  persons  their  (1979, p . 8 2 ) . think  of argument...  with  due,'  one  another'  of  Nowheresville  of  feet  essential without  but  having  t o a l l human  rights  Nowheresvilie  are grateful  (1979, p. 8 4 ) . lack  a world  rights,  Even when t h e y  leap to their  is  need no  for anything  are t r e a t e d badly,  called not  notion  be of  done f o r them they  'do  not  and make r i g h t e o u s demands a g a i n s t According  to Feinberg,  the 'personal d i g n i t y '  the  people  (1979, p . 87) o f  3  persons do  because  t h e y do n o t have  n o t know how t o , and a r e u n a b l e Feinberg  part as  regards  of the d i g n i t y , persons  (1979,  persons  might  Without  the a b i l i t y  status,  p. 8 7 ) .  be s i m p l y  able  to assert  dignity  as persons.  these  limits  are  thus a s s e r t e d that essential Some claimed  rights  and s e l f - r e s p e c t  accountability,  cannot  those  upon s u c h a t t r i b u t e s .  mentally  restricting  deficient  opportunities capacity example,  as  they  will  of our  because  we  u s , and i f  to object. claim  Iti s  rights  not  possess  of persons  are  F o r example,  are  the apparent  lack  i s c o n s i d e r e d by some  their  right  not  claim  the  which  t o freedom. the  right  c a n o t h e r human b e i n g s , b e c a u s e  might  part  s u c h a s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and  rights  t o use t h e s e o p p o r t u n i t i e s  as o t h e r human It  may  Being  a l l human b e i n g s , and some may be  of p e r s o n s ,  m a t u r i t y o f young c h i l d r e n  demand  of persons.  Human b e i n g s who do  claim  p. 8 7 ) .  treated.  can t r e a t  to  have  to  self-respect  and t h e a b i l i t y  to  (1979,  important  we a r e e n t i t l e d  integral  respect for  unable  we a r e b e i n g u n f a i r l y  belong  features  for  are  t o how o t h e r p e r s o n s  distinguishing  reason  we  that  rights  t h u s becomes a v e r y  o n l y by p e r s o n s .  dependent  rights,  exceeded,  they  human b e i n g s  he s u g g e s t s  respect f o r their  t o the d i g n i t y rights  Indeed,  I t p r o v i d e s us w i t h  know t h e r e a r e l i m i t s  rights,  t o make c l a i m s a s an  and s e l f - r e s p e c t  to claim  rights  Lacking  t o make c l a i m s .  the a b i l i t y  r e d r e s s when we t h i n k t h a t  of  rights.  a  relevant  S i m i l a r l y , the to they  in a responsible  n o t have t h e same o p p o r t u n i t i e s  certain lack the  way. to  For  freedom  beings.  be a r g u e d  that  p r i s o n e r s a r e human b e i n g s  as  well  4  as  persons.  They  possess  any r i g h t s  human b e i n g s a s human  beings,  claimed  by p e r s o n s .  by  in particular  a l l human b e i n g s  the  status  i s the r i g h t  and d i g n i t y  b e i n g s have t h e r i g h t treatment  or  dignity  a s human b e i n g s .  human b e i n g s ,  any  rights  A right  be  always  injustice  This right  including  is  prisoners,  can  with  respect  T h i s means t h a t  treated  would  which  be  w h i c h c a n be c l a i m e d  t o be t r e a t e d  o f human b e i n g s .  to  unfair  all  and  w h i c h c a n be c l a i m e d by  fairly,  due human  f o r any  be a v i o l a t i o n  of t h e i r  'inalienable,'  because  can never  be d e p r i v e d o f  it. Prisoners are also persons. persons if  i s much d e b a t e d .  not  a l l , that  proposed  feature  distinguishes for  at least  only  them,  I will  persons  is  What d i s t i n g u i s h e s adopt  are  actions.  - accountable beings  Another  f e a t u r e of persons  are  also  p.  181),  volitions' desires  whatever  must  chapter argues  from  dogs  and  be  also  capable  'beliefs  their  want t o have  certain  and m o t i v e s .  t o be d i f f e r e n t ,  that  possessing  fish  about  (Dennett,  1976,  'second  order  of  the  beliefs  of o t h e r s ' :  wanting  else  Since these features  to  (p. 192), of h a v i n g  desires  second  - c a n be p u n i s h e d .  derives  ...men may a l s o  of  A later  wants, and i n t e n t i o n s .  a s s i g n e d by some persons  Persons,  A  a r e c u l p a b l e — t h e y c a n be h e l d r e s p o n s i b l e  some o f t h e i r  desires,  as  common t o most,  a b l e t o use r e a s o n .  responsibility.  persons  beliefs,  t h e view,  persons  ( o r n o t t o have) They a r e c a p a b l e in their  preferences  and  5  and  purposes,  animal  .  .  reflective in  the  state  rights, respect  they  and  other  means  o f f e n c e s and  therefore  must  rights.  prisoners society  In  retain  being  still  persons.  be  entail five  and  (Correctional  as  Law  the  be  Review  be of of  regard  and the  d e p r i v a t i o n of of  put  of o t h e r  removed  rights  involves  denial  will  a  done  claimants  t r e a t e d with  privileges  necessarily  of t h e  and  the  it  have  They must  Punishment  such  also  essential  who  violation  persons.  chapter  those  those  persons  is  the  even  still  does not  personhood  retains  their  rights,  the r i g h t s  'except  incarceration'  and  certain but  desires...  one that  cease  liberty/mobility,  other  i s manifested  human,  as  not  of  that  being  long  as human b e i n g s  deprivation  No  t o have t h e c a p a c i t y f o r  r e p r e h e n s i b l e are  do  . . .  192)  of  This  are  second-order  p.  so  for their but  of  state  something m o r a l l y  others,  appears  1976,  prerequisites.  punished  what t h e y  self-evaluation  the  permanent  .  formation  (Dennett,  Like  from  or  various  forth  that  members  of  restricted  Working  by  Paper  One,  have a  right  respect.  They  1986). Prisoners to  be  t r e a t e d with  s h o u l d be and  punished  human b e i n g s fairness,  denial.  which  others  Thus, with right  can  and  and  This entails have u n l e s s  shown  to  be  then, and  recognizes their  just  r e f e r e n c e to the be  persons,  with d i g n i t y  i n a manner w h i c h  s t a t u s as p e r s o n s .  rights  this  as  being  c a u s e be  right  their  dignity  allowed  to hold  given  for  to education,  fairly  forfeitted  their unless during  6  punishment, their  denying  rights  as  i t to prisoners human  beings  would  -  be  a  and persons  violation  of  - t o be t r e a t e d  fairly. PRISONERS AND THE LEGAL RIGHT TO EDUCATION Ought p r i s o n e r s t o have a l e g a l argument Chapter  presented two,  in  penitentiary this  particular,  education  argument.  penitentiary  opinion  about  of  is  Another  is  (Ontario  Institute  review  be  many  in  have  of e d u c a t i o n  as a  One  example  is  unimportant,'  f u n c t i o n of  prisons'  is  that  of  the  doubts  'relatively  terms  for Studies  of  commendable  A t t h e same t i m e ,  opinion  'inadequate  The  s u p p l i e s the b a s i s of  incarceration.  'only a rather marginal  provided  may  programs.  'education  p. 1 1 ) .  its  i n Canada,  there  education?  t h e p r o v i s i o n and q u a l i t y  component that  occupies 1981,  Briefly,  to  c o n s e q u e n t i a l i s t i n nature.  through  system  education  been e x p r e s s e d beneficial  i s essentially  right  in Education  Review  and  (Cosman,  the education  quantity  an  and  being  quality'  [OISE],  1978,  p. 4 ) . According of Canada that  to a previous  [CSC],  education  communication, Association  director  the bureaucracy was  o f t h e CSC a t t h a t t i m e  not a r i g h t  Oct.1985).  (1985)  in  of the C o r r e c t i o n s S e r v i c e  of p r i s o n e r s  The  Canadian  i t s development  c o r r e c t i o n s came t o t h e same c o n c l u s i o n . that  such  a factor,  whether  something  makes a d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e way p e r s o n s education  is  not  recognised  as  (Cosman,  decided personal  Criminal  Justice  of s t a n d a r d s  for adult  It  is  being  i s p e r c e i v e d as a  act  a right  toward  i t .  claimed right, Because  i n some p e n i t e n t i a r y  7  circles,  for  interest  factor  penitentiary enjoying  to  such  are  made  Cultural  non-prisoners  Rights,  to  assistance education for  example, tax  the  education' of  the right financial  they  to  the  that  the  exemptions,  citizens  the  provision  of f u n d s , may Report  Covenant  of  of  a  impede  Canada'  the  Social  supports  of the r i g h t s of With  reference to  primary  education, with  access  as  being  reported  and h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n i s provided  scholarships,  this  on  on E c o n o m i c ,  of  have  factors,  o f Canada  realization  to  to  Certain  who have d i f f i c u l t y  t o secondary  terminate  i s , appear  The same m e a s u r e s a r e  assistance  or  grounds  upon t h e g o o d w i l l o f  1985, p. 4 ) .  right  the  are presently  the  for  'Government  (Feb.  against  have no  reduce  like  grounds  entitled.  or lack  provided persons  (p. 5 ) .  i f they  access to education.  ' t o promote t h e f u l l  is  to  bureaucracy,  according  implementation  loans,  insufficient  complaint  dependent  o f The I n t e r n a t i o n a l  measures taken  (p.  decisions  as the l e g a l  But,  everyone  of v a l i d  example, even  as g e o g r a p h i c a l l o c a t i o n ,  taken  for  p r i s o n e r s have no l e g a l  T h i s means t h a t ,  they  implementation  For  challenge  unproblematic  access.  to  reason  educational f a c i l i t i e s ,  persons,  relatively  the  a  t o which they a r e m o r a l l y  Other  such  For  programs.  Nowheresvilie,  something  implies  system.  which  others,  be  i n the event  excellent  educational  and  also  seeking action  with  might  i n i t s implementation.  This for  example,  and  in  the  summer  (p. 6 ) . form  of  employment  7). O p p o r t u n i t i e s o f a c c e s s t o e d u c a t i o n would  thus  appear  in  8  the  main  prisoners  entrenched have  provision,  grounds  they  justification position.  within  can  for seek  cannot  On  t h e whole,  dissatisfaction the  and r e d r e s s .  They  society.  with  intervention  Prisoners  do  seek t h e s u p p o r t  educational  of  not  i f non-  the  occupy  law f o r such  a  o f t h e law f o r b e t t e r  educat i o n . T h i s c o u l d be b e c a u s e prisoners Yet  can  claim rights,  the Canadian Charter  "constitutional out  or  rights  of R i g h t s  a right  other  than  protect society.  provided  those  ideally  Along all  such  penitentiaries  facilities. exist and  lines,  good  standards education  federal  maintained would  Prisoners persons  implies that then  i n Chapter  and p r o v i n c i a l  If this  to  if  turns  punish  them  which  other  education  the r i g h t  is  to equality  throughout. ensure  question  of adequate two, some  whether  educational  discrepancies  i n men's a n d women's p r i s o n s prisons.  a r e made a v a i l a b l e  It  is  only  fair  t o a l l and s a t i s f a c t o r y  Entrenching  a legal  right  to  t h a t a l l p r i s o n e r s can c l a i m the  i n programs.  are in a situation be  promises  to e v e r y o n e — i n c l u d i n g p r i s o n e r s .  be seen  of q u a l i t y  will  necessary  i t i s also possible to  help  (1984)  prisoners to continue to  i n Canada c a n b o a s t  programs  same s t a n d a r d s  other  This  that  to education.  them t o c l a i m r i g h t s  between e d u c a t i o n a l p r o g r a m s  between  that  As w i l l  enable  of s o c i e t y ,  makes i t a v a i l a b l e  accepted  the r i g h t  a n d Freedoms  thought  I t allows  members  generally  of e q u a l i t y r i g h t s .  might  members o f s o c i e t y p o s s e s s . being  not  l e t alone  guarantees"  t o be s o , s u c h  claim  it is  hostile  where i t c a n be e x p e c t e d to  them.  F o r example,  that it  is  9  possible  that  prisoners  prison  guards  having a right  hostile  have  ensure  p r i s o n e r s a r e not i n t e r f e r e d  they might receive  take  the  education,  are  also  from , ;  usually  i s associated  for  the  better.  may  be  taught  employable.  Chapter  certain  by  had  not  with  and r e f o r m e d ,  of  feel  in  any  and t h a t  of h a v i n g a l e g a l being  able  right  to claim  they  efforts  they  still  or a c c e s s t o  to  with c e r t a i n  perform  a  four w i l l of  intellectual  or  in stating for from  the  skill  education.  and  benefits Typically,  and  forms.  thus  changes A person  become  e l a b o r a t e how a p r o m i n e n t education or  Frankena  disdains  fosters  or i s intended to foster  is  that  improvement ways.  a person  better  terming  education  t h e p r o v i s i o n of  improvements  cognitive that  to  i n some o f t h o s e  attributed  criteria  changed  idea  to education could  educational benefits,  i t s betterment  contradiction'  right  T h e s e b e n e f i t s c a n t a k e many to  R.S.Peters'  assessable  A  programs which can r e s u l t  education  of  right.  of  consequences  advantages  the  persons.  derived  educational and  kind  as o t h e r  Positive  such  t o be e d u c a t e d  same  to  t o e d u c a t i o n , when t h e y might  themselves that  no  would be  (1966,  anything  of  persons  education  in  'logical  educated,  p. 3 ) .  desirable  feature  education i s  He s e e s a  had been  more  but  Similarly, 'unless  dispositions'  it  (1965,  p. 6 ) . Multiple  c o n c e p t i o n s of ' d e s i r a b l e '  promoted  through  t h e many  shifts  betterment"  of  the ages. and human  changes beings  A common has  d i s p o s i t i o n s have  ideal  been  (Brumbaugh  been  w h i c h has p e r m e a t e d  that and  of  the  "self-  L a w r e n c e , 1963,  10  p.  9).  being  Thus no m a t t e r what  d e s i r a b l e for education,  improvement Whether can  of p e r s o n s  i t be  state, way.  infer  as an  that This  seeking prison  that  i s why  are able the  related  to  persons.  There  opportunities  in  and  criminal  University  change  with  for  reason  developing  ways,  were  be  their  previous  i n a more mature of  education  is significant likely  person  t o be  can  mental  more  these if  to  such  this  intellectual and  ways,  and  for prisoners  rational  p r i s o n e r s , i f exposed in  the  needed.  In  and  informed  in  educational  develop. sought  as  change  done w i t h i n an  of  one  a s t a t e of mind  reason  and  especially  reasoning  to  might  improved  c o n t r i b u t e toward  these  not  also  ways  of  decreasing  activities.  education Chapter Education  deemed  why  conveyed,  over  improvements  becoming  programs can five  will  Program  T h i s p r o g r a m e x e m p l i f i e s how goals  being  acquired  a  a l s o be  development  i s no  i n these  view.  remained c o n s i s t e n t .  perspective  which  can  persons  the  overall  Prison  have  t o t h i n k and  t h e c h a n g e s and  prowess,  their  has  or d e v e l o p m e n t  in  things  help  dissertation,  thinking  and  where d e s i r a b l e c h a n g e s a r e  Many to  improve  n o t i o n of d e v e l o p m e n t and  or v a l u e s  n o t i o n and  T h e r e a r e many ways  process  as  b r i n g about d e s i r a b l e changes  context,  develop.  changes are advocated  education  they  improvement  they  to  with  the  knowledge, s k i l l s  usually  considered  are  individual  as  being  incorporated into  run  be  formulated  d i s c u s s an  example,  by  Fraser  Simon  the c r i t e r i a  particularly  a program.  with  this t h a t of  I t must be  and  those  to prisoners  noted,  the  University.  of e d u c a t i o n  beneficial  aim  though,  can that  11  these kind  goals  and  of  education  The  concern  consciously  to  of  programs  to  placement  (and  just  the  (1987, p.  in  It  the  stated  along  they  to  be  goals  of  require  able  i s feared,  occupational  are  education  to  skills  who only keep  however,  criminals  justified  of  that  and  job  rather  than  in  prisoners  This  might  is especially  programs are  job-oriented  equation There  educational  achieve  t o engage p e r s o n s whether  or  the  be  states:  improvement.  changes  development  any  p r o g r a m must  releasing prisoners  job-holding  education  empirical  being  desirable  underlie  purely  in their  content...  7)  participate  is  in  that  career  and  automatically What  point  direct  education who  on  any  of  trade  administrators  when the  technical,  can  Some p r i s o n e r s  l e a d to educated c r i m i n a l s .  important  No  focus  Duguid  ...Correctional  crimes.  ^honest)  result  reformed c r i m i n a l s .  some  employed.  only  will  raising  represent  those d i r e c t e d at  (honestly) which  achieving  t o commit  useful  themselves  they  the d i s s e r t a t i o n i s t h a t  mainly  less inclined learn a  criteria  programs i n p r i s o n .  geared  incarceration, are  the  in  success is  that  persons,  commendable  from  being  i s no  of  becoming  education and  to  or  but  between  that  persons  'tasks'  educated  facilitate  be  activities.  will  persons.  aims t o b r i n g  I t would be  tasks,  these  made  guarantee  activities  lines.  in educational  benefit  is  about their  logically  odd  indifferent  to  It  is  thus  1 2  important  that education  concept  of  education  c h a n g e and  regarding  the  evidence  changes  educated.  t o e n s u r e an  with  genuinely  is  sparse,  i n c h a r a c t e r and  The  only  i n c r e a s e i n grade  possible  in order  i n p r i s o n measure up  effects  level  be  rationale  wrong, o r  itself  tools  the  apart on  powerful  Education  ...Although predict  we  may  should  general  correlated  that  may  and  be measured might  be  p.  7).  An  analogy  is  they  may  never  be  suggest,  teaching  The  meaningful.  not  guarantee  instruments of  success  and  not  the  that  education  character,  of  the  they As  CSC:  to  education, social  factors,  i t i s known t h a t e d u c a t i o n with  other  i t s transformation.  T r a i n i n g Calendar  impact  like  methods  g o a l s of  and  l a c k the  present  the  i n a p p r o p r i a t e , but  p e r s o n a l i t y and  future success,  of p e o p l e  in  is  the  population...  (1982, p.  There  toward  of  only  supplements to  a c c u r a t e l y the  from o t h e r  highly  valid,  of e d u c a t i o n  nevertheless  q u o t e d by  this  result  That  is misdirected.  remain w o r t h w h i l e , The  are  might  1987,  persons.  in character  skeptism  p e r c e p t i o n s as  (Duguid,  non-incarcerated  changed  approaches  still  orientation  and  w h i c h can  i n s t a n c e s of u n s u c c e s s f u l t e a c h i n g ,  aims or  to  betterment.  Admittedly,  being  programs  is  'changed,' and  B5)  no  necessary  connection  avoiding/committing  crime.  between b e i n g But  the  educated,  amelioration  1 3  of  crime  one  i s too  must  seek  deliberate  It  is  deliberately prisoners  their  suggested  increase  that  to develop  their  increase  likelihood fully  which  to chance.  are  guided  persons  that and  and  right  these  the  it  intellectually  to  be  to  due  is help  provide rational,  others.  education  potential  accorded  may  horizons,  actions affect  a legal  by  because  capacity  their  Thus  d e s i r a b l e changes i n  education,  their  utilized,  left  about  mental c a p a c i t i e s  that e s t a b l i s h i n g  are  t o be  bringing  a w a r e n e s s of how  the  education  activities of  geared  broaden  a problem  possible  alternatives,  increase is  those  intention  persons.  more  important  It will  benefits attention  of and  priority. According in s/he  chapter has  function  t o the c r i t e r i a  four),  one  shown some s o r t  of R.  does not of  liberate  critical  ( t o be  a person in  elaborated  educated  these  unless  ways.  The  the mind, s t r e n g t h e n i t s  powers,  inform  human s y m p a t h i e s , practical  i t with  n o t i o n of  development  of  notion  and  knowledge  inquiry,  illuminate  and  engage i t s  i t s moral  and  choices...  (Scheffler,  a  call  development  the c a p a c i t y f o r independent  Such  Peters  of e d u c a t i o n i s :  ...to  This  S.  1973,  p.  education  139)  p e r f o r m s a more i n f l u e n t i a l  prisoners' intellectual of  education  and  mental  i s s e e n as b e i n g  role  in  the  competencies. integral  to  any  1 4  efforts  and p r o c e s s e s  prisoners.  of these  i t ensures  show t h a t t h e s e  emphasis  over  that  referred  time.  prisoners  to  i t s d i v e r s i t y of  as  Regardless  of  an i m p o r t a n t  will  reform, often  c a n s e r v e many p u r p o s e s .  cease  changes  in  to  commit  facilities  a n d s e r v i c e s f o r h e l p i n g p r i s o n e r s improve  literate, that  abandon t h e i r  undoubtedly achieve that  i s the focus The  case  education order  i n order  that  efficiently authorities education Because  changes.  made  for  It  is  promising themselves  more m o r a l ,  the  lifestyle.  a  legal  to ensure p r i o r i t y  ultimate  more hope  O t h e r methods c a n  education,  right  of  however,  can  be  programs  are  available,  the system  recognize  fully  felt.  While  there  i s some  i s perhaps not o p e r a t i n g as f u l l y A p o s s i b l e reason the p o t e n t i a l  i s not a p r i o r i t y , i t i s not a r i g h t  prisoners to  attention to education, i n  effects  as i t c o u l d . may  with  etc.,  study.  education  that  but always criminal  i t s beneficial  penitentiary misgiving  such  of  is  t h e more  by b e c o m i n g more C h r i s t i a n ,  more e m p l o y a b l e ,  they  among  the  Whether  reintegration,  has  some way, e i t h e r  considered  crimes.  and  public  g o a l h a s a l w a y s been  rehabilitation,  been  Chapter  in direction  education  in  reform  t h e g e n u i n e e d u c a t i o n a l w o r t h and  p u r p o s e s have s h i f t e d  pronouncements or l a b e l s , hope  with  and  TO THE CHAPTER  A p e r i o d of i n c a r c e r a t i o n will  educate  programs.  CONCLUSION  two  indeed  Thus, w i t h i n a p r i s o n c o n t e x t  p r o g r a m s and g o a l s , value  which aim t o  i t i s easily  of  c o u l d be t h a t education,  shelved  of p r i s o n e r s , there  and while  because  and n e g l e c t e d .  i s no one t o whom  15  anyone the  need answer  rest  such a  to f o r t h i s  of the d i s s e r t a t i o n claim.  lack  to f i n d  of a t t e n t i o n . the  grounds  I t remains to to  validate  16  II. The for  tasks  a moral  legislating used w i l l  PENITENTIARY EDUCATION of  IN CANADA  the d i s s e r t a t i o n are to d i s c u s s  r i g h t of p r i s o n e r s  to education,  this  i t i s believed  right.  While  be s i g n i f i c a n t  Canadian p e n i t e n t i a r y the  discussion.  that  this  for incarcerated  education  A focus  system  and t h e g r o u n d s f o r that  the arguments  persons elsewhere, the  i s t h e main  backdrop  to  of the d i s s e r t a t i o n i s the p o s s i b i l i t y  system might, w i t h the l e g i s l a t i o n  education,  the grounds  of  p e r f o r m o r o p e r a t e more e f f i c i e n t l y  the  right  than a t  to  present.  A BRIEF REVIEW OF THE PENITENTIARY SYSTEM In the  Canada, t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r c o r r e c t i o n s  f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l  1867  (Ekstedt,  over p r i s o n s  and r e f o r m a t o r i e s ,  penitentiaries  The  and  terms  meaning'  federal  and  than  'places  Law Review W o r k i n g  Paper  difference,  however,  the  O f f e n d e r s w i t h more t h a n  in  has it  years  over  reformatories,  and  of  provincial  Two,  1986,  duration  of  sentence  little custody'  p. 3 ) .  A  sentences.  are  incarcerated  shorter  sentences  institutions.  The  d i s s e r t a t i o n concerns a l l inmates.  to  be k e p t  i n mind when d e s c r i b i n g  may be r e l e v a n t or  'carry secure  f e d e r a l p e n i t e n t i a r i e s , and those with  provincial cut  two  in  jurisdiction  jurisdiction  actually  (Correctional  lies  C o n s t i t u t i o n Act  provincial  prisons,  a r e 'not d e f i n e d , '  inherent  within  The  1984, p. 44) e s t a b l i s h e d  penitentiaries.  more  governments.  i s s h a r e d by  whether  federal  one  system.  a s i t i s made o u t t o sound.  is  The j u d i c i a l  education  referring  But t h e s y s t e m We  are informed  split  p r o g r a m s when  to  either  the  i s n o t as c l e a r that  Canada's  1 7  correctional segmented' p.  4).  system  (Correctional  Law  Approximately  institutions. form  i s 'complex, h i g h l y  of  A  12,000  further  conditional  Review  approximately  20,000 i n m a t e s ,  remand.  any  At  non-custodial Paper  One,  time,  p.  from maximum s e c u r i t y programming community even  or  p.  institutions  correctional  Calendar Division  medium  Upgrading  and  of  Studies  (CSC)  other  some  Law  custody  77,000  f a r m and  on  serving  Review,  Working  also  comparatively  range 'little  f o r e s t r y camps,  and  i n s t i t u t i o n s are  Review W o r k i n g Paper  states  (1982-83) the  Secondary  provincial  (Ministry  activities  of  the  and  School  C o u r s e s and  level,  One,  upgrading Correctional  C e n t r e has (p.  a  15).  In  Centre,  there  school the  programs Adult  University  The The  Education  is  Education, Vocational  Courses.  stated  1980,  actual  p.  7)  George  i s 'a d e f i n i t e  being among  Island  need'  to  of  Regional  program which p r o v i d e s Vancouver  as  availability  Prince  and  available  Programs,  Attorney-General,  programs.  the  Basic  education  e d u c a t i o n , however, seems t o v a r y . Correctional  of  following  maximum s e c u r i t y p r i s o n s :  Courses,  the  provided  in  i n s t i t u t i o n s can  Law  on  PENITENTIARY EDUCATION PROGRAMS  P r o g r a m s , Community C o l l e g e At  20%  Provincial  (Correctional  federal  5).  The  in  centres.  60 are  approximately  with  1986,  i n s t i t u t i o n s 'house'  about  Federal  and  One,  in  offenders  (Correctional  5).  A BRIEF REVIEW OF  Training  with  dispersed  Paper are  Provincial  inmate movement,' t o  'more d i v e r s e '  1986,  inmates  there are  dispositions 1986,  Working  7,000 f e d e r a l  release.  diverse,  academic Regional  develop  a  18  'wider  range  education' is  expanding  use  are  training  Correctional  on  they  there  12).  be  needed  in  said  education Review, policy  -  of  was  t o be  to  the  include  and  constructive Regional  p.  22).  other  programs  education,  lifeskills,  Attorney-General,  For as  as  and and  in comparison  with  Training,  a  spiritual  assume t h e i r  p.  conform  t o the  tool  reformation  of  as  early  possible,' in  work,  development 7).  Section  shall  upon d i s c h a r g e ,  requirements  goals  as  stipulates  responsibilities  - began t o  humane  that be  be and  as  1851, (OISE  to  as c i t i z e n s of the  and  law...  with  the  recreation, (Ministry 2.10  of  'programs  designed  possible:  inmates,  or  C o l u m b i a , more c u r r e n t l y , t h e  vocational education'  prepare  1985,  i s a problem,  example,  activities  1980,  CSC,  7).  more  'humane  Service Regulations  and  In  activities  with  In B r i t i s h  t o be  and  persons.  that d i s a b i l i t y  with  of  educable  l e a r n i n g (p.  punishment.  of  to  Women  academic  for  'under-educated  coinciding  provision  ...to  for  Lower M a i n l a n d  also  (Education  along  i s apparently  academic  in  evidence  conceived  1978,  Penitentiary  training,  C o r r e c t i o n a l Centre  are  i n c a p a b l e of  prisons  conceptions  lifeskills  More a c t i v i t i e s  whole  i s no  inmates are  provided  work,  apparently,  (p.  the  are  Education  the  Lakeside  Canadian a d u l t s , '  6 ) , but  that  to  in  Centre.  Inmates  other  The  programs,  seen  general,  programs  (p. 9 ) .  vocational  p.  of  as  of the of  f a r as  19  (Education  The  and  Penitentiary  will  be  Act  provided  individual equipped  T r a i n i n g , CSC,  has  Training,  lead  CSC,  stated  among o t h e r s  offenders to  also  by  1980,  that  1985).  The  Report  of  First  Organizational also  help  the  promises programs  productively'  and  The quality look  concern of  to  which  become l a w - a b i d i n g '  the  a whole  p.  next  the  a concrete  i s that  skills.  and  Service 'serve  of  Canada  their  to a s s i s t  time  them  to  21). the  section  adequacy  i s an  lack  of  any  programs.  The  the  only  f e d e r a l system.  most r e c e n t  (1978).  Hudson t e l l s  us  studies  dealt  education  with  cohesive  sometimes  comprehensive  that  and  c r i t i q u e s encountered  f e d e r a l s y s t e m , and  to  education  Mission  likely  1984,  accredited  knowledge and  the  'most  offenders  and  attempt  to  picture  of  PENITENTIARY EDUCATION  to o b t a i n i n g  programs w i t h i n  a  their  offenders  The  that  provincially  d i s s e r t a t i o n i s with  particular be  better  matter.  as  to only  states  Corrections  help  (Task F o r c e ,  of  obstacle  system  apply  the  are  A BRIEF ASSESSMENT OF  the  of  lives'  also  improve  programs p r o v i d e d .  into this  An  1987)  Task F o r c e on  Development  society  the  encouraged to p a r t i c i p a t e i n will  assist  C o m m i s s i o n e r ' s D i r e c t i v e on  should  which  to  and  and  of O f f e n d e r s  programs  public  programs  (Education  Education be  (CSC,  the  them  acceptable  The  2)  educational  'to p r o t e c t  returning  socially  p.  between and  There  evaluation  seems t o be 1945  and  of  the  1967  sometimes apply thus  to  seems  a l l prison OISE Review only  eight  training in prisons  (1981,  20  p.  163). According  evaluations  to Ekstedt  have  penitentiary  been  education  (1984,  conducted  p. 185) on  the  programs i n C a n a d i a n  as  well,  'Few  effectiveness  institutions'  of  (1984,  p. 1 8 5 ) . There a r e c e r t a i n f a c t o r s , s i t u a t i o n s , however,  which  indicate  certain  s t a t e m e n t made by t h e d i s s e r t a t i o n ought  that  educational  only  some  One  areas.  i s , after  persons  all,  i n Canada,  so i t i s  can r e p o r t  Certain  In  and P r o v i n c i a l  being the  as a r e s u l t  and r e v e a l i n g c a u s e  provided term  Although  which  inmates  also  educational  to  should  t h e argument  is  It  motivate  be  required  of sentence.  whatever  be  places  education  prisoners  be  mere  is  perfunctory  i n a short-term  may o n l y  positive  be ' p a s s i n g  and c o n c r e t e . to  resources in  not  to occur  o p p o r t u n i t i e s once t h e y educational  that  i s not t h a t a l l p r i s o n e r s  that  should  likely  i n these  still  It i s  f o r men a n d  be a d e q u a t e , w o r t h w h i l e , a n d d e s e r v i n g o f  'education.'  programs, can  More  i n f e d e r a l and  such as those  of d i f f e r e n c e s i n d u r a t i o n  t h e same p r o g r a m s .  provision,  might  'differences' are inevitable,  the d i s s e r t a t i o n ,  receive  satisfactory  p r i s o n s , and t h e d i f f e r e n c e s i n e d u c a t i o n  must a r i s e  main  education  c o n c e r n a r e t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between e d u c a t i o n  women.  The  that  o f t h e s i t u a t i o n s seen a s e x i s t i n g ,  provincial  evident,  experiences.  Differences: Federal  seen  problem  t o be made a v a i l a b l e t o a l l p r i s o n e r s  insufficient  for  and i s s u e s  certain  seek  leave  through,'  Good  other  prison.  programs  worthwhile  prison.  and f a c i l i t i e s provincial  have  just  prisons.  been No  21  substantive are at  available random.  Columbia  Any  turnover  of  allocation  right  of  i s justly  enough  Federation  Conference,  lack  having  the f u l l  standards right  to  standards  the  i s an  might  Education  i s made  A  higher  consideration i n the not  b e n e f i t s of programs.  however,  British  within the p r o v i n c i a l  important  Inmates  have  p r i s o n e r s , as  to the shorter sentence.  be  around  The c a l l  long  for the  f o r a l l inmates.  As  show, i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t one may n e v e r  need  a s s e r t one's r i g h t s - - u n l e s s t h r e a t e n e d ,  services/goods  fight  (Corrections  on e d u c a t i o n  collected  r e s o u r c e s and  for materials other  1987).  emphasis  to  programs  educators  of adequate  Feb.  of resources.  three w i l l  lack  obtaining  attributed  to education,  Chapter  prison education  provincial  were  population  t o reap  the  relates  non-prisoners  Association  certain  at  One t e a c h e r Teachers  as  system  example,  unhappiness  materials.  well  of p r o v i n c i a l  beyond d i s g r u n t l e d comments and o p i n i o n s For  expressed  to  evaluation  o r when r e q u i r i n g t h e  granted  by t h e r i g h t .  However,  of e d u c a t i o n  in provincial  institutions  education  will  of e d u c a t i o n  as  enable  i f indeed  the  a r e lower, t h e  a l l i n m a t e s t o demand  equal  elsewhere.  D i f f e r e n c e s : Men a n d Women For shorter poor.  reasons  of  sentence, The C a l e n d a r  Division available Education,  of at  a  education  population,  (1982-83)  federal  Pre-secondary  and  a  supposedly  f o r women p r i s o n e r s i s s a i d  of S t u d i e s of  t h e CSC the  smaller  Prison Language  the  Education  cites  following  f o r Women: and  and  t o be  Training  courses Basic  Mathematics,  as  Adult  Secondary  22  Art,  Biology,  Chemistry; Data P r o c e s s i n g ,  Procedures,  Physics,  Upholstery,  Woodworking.  An Report  evaluation  General  Science,  Office  I n d u s t r i a l Sewing,  the  1979  OISE  t o t h e S o l i c i t o r - G e n e r a l , does n o t seem so e n c o u r a g i n g :  be  told  that  the Prison  there  there  i s a fair  .  one i s s h a r p l y  between  While  things  particular  to give  may  report,  have  up t h e i r  Education The  want  one may even assume involvement  some t i m e w i t h  .  .  that  .  .  i n m a t e s and  the grave  discrepancy  and p r a c t i c e s . . .  improved  since  the  some d o u b t s c a n n e v e r t h e l e s s  writing still  be  educator  has s t a t e d  that  be t r a n s f e r r e d away from  Association  Conference, Feb.  C a n a d i a n Human  raised  women  s o - c a l l e d r i g h t of access t o education to  of t h i s  i n p r i s o n s - - e s p e c i a l l y at the p r o v i n c i a l  A provincial prison  not  .  1981, p. 389)  women's e d u c a t i o n  level.  .  aware "of  stated p o l i c i e s  (Sandeman,  r a n g e o f day a n d e v e n i n g  amount o f i n m a t e  However, a f t e r s p e n d i n g staff,  f o r Women, one may  is a full  programs and a c t i v i t i e s ,  did  Typing,  o f t h e p r o g r a m s , however, by  ...When v i s i t i n g  about  Family Studies,  Rights  'home'  if  have they  (Corrections  1987).  Commission  (1981)  found  that  'women a r e v i c t i m s  of d i s c r i m i n a t i o n  i n the f e d e r a l  system'  (Ekstedt,  p. 325). At t h e p r o v i n c i a l  level,  as the  Incarcerated  well  Ministry  of  1984,  the  Women i n B r i t i s h  Attorney-General's  Columbia  penitentiary  study  on  Provincial Institutions  23  (1978), on  the  and  the  Incarceration  inequalities (Ekstedt, indeed Two  1984,  p.  324).  The  Cost  narrower  ...Natural  1981,  statement  has  Director  'priority 1978,  p.  of  given 68).  Education  A  been  made  and  that  front' and  provision  than of  a  treatment this  may  appear...  1983,  declared  the  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n  penitentiary  education  38),  news i s bad  insufficient'  Hoekama,  is  'the  is  decision-making.'  boredom.'  much s m a l l e r  the  Training  responsible  relieve  and  322).  (Jubinville,  a t t e n t i o n to education  to  322).  388)  s t u d y done by  (1981, p.  be  e q u a l i t y of  'insufficient  employment'  may  p.  programming' p.  however d i f f i c u l t  education  (Duguid  1984,  1984,  has  human r i g h t s demand  Education  to  prisoners  However:  whole p e n i t e n t i a r y e d u c a t i o n The  found  female o f f e n d e r s '  justify  to b r i n g  p.  women  'institutional  might  and  efforts  and  Commission  both  (Ekstedt,  women p r i s o n e r s  female p r i s o n e r s ,  (Sandeman,  men  (Ekstedt,  programs.  justice  unremitting for  of  for  Royal  (1978),  ' p r o b l e m of  are  effectiveness  range of  Columbia  proportions'  problems  population  British  programs  a v a i l a b l e research'  The  A  the  Female O f f e n d e r s  'reached c r i t i c a l  of  men.  of  of  between  particular  'lack  Report  1985, values,'  Cosman's  mainly provided or as  a  p. and  'time-filling'  p.  the 2).  that  (OISE  the  Review, of  187)  Adult  reports  'education  opinion 'as  on  for  is  that  preparation activity  .  for  24  ...Penitentiary characterized in  education  by  a general  genuine e d u c a t i o n a l  standards by  of  teacher  (1981, p.  a matter  of  Ekstedt  (Ekstedt,  education  been  and  1984,  p.  Many  qualified  and  the  vocational  and  structure...  provided  184).  be The  space,  a t t e n t i o n i n the  Bell  existence training  are and  a l s o been  p.  issues  'the  in  Report and  early  beset  teachers  inadequate  staff  these  to  1985,  is  'largely  the  system.  and  'deficient  reported  by  most  have  been  need  a  p.  160)  cause  for  identified 1984,  years.  as  p.  58)  Problems  meaningful  programs'  Adult  institutions  (Ekstedt,  for  the  Physical  1981,  materials'  through the  education  187).  (Hudson,  1800's'  numerous r e f o r m s a t t e m p t e d in  of  C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n of  Hoekama, to  of  seen  T h i s has  75)  said  'inadequate  'requiring  184).  (1978, p.  are  concern.  have  insufficiently  (Duguid  facilities  still  training, .  l a c k of d i s c i p l i n e  academic  problems  (1984, p.  Review  Education  p.  even t h e  reports  curricula'  despite  s e l e c t i o n and  inadequate  'skill-training.'  Certain  found  interest  a c h i e v e m e n t , by  , a  been  40)  thinks that  OISE  l a c k of  a l a c k of d i s c r i m i n a t i o n i n m a t t e r s  curriculum  He  i n Canada has  work  (Ekstedt,  and 1984,  59). Diversity Another  education  and  Complexity  situation  to s t a b i l i z e  indicative affairs  i s the  of  the  need  diversity  for a and  right  to  complexity  25  of  the  system  are  informed  (as mentioned  of the 'gross  arbitrariness' p.  itself  earlier).  irregularities,  (Correctional  F o r example,  l a c k of standards  we and  Law Review W o r k i n g P a p e r One, 1986,  5) . The  be  a  l a c k of coherence w i t h i n  possible  education  in influencing  a r e v i e w e d and c a r r i e d  education, education  Dennison  sees  programs a c r o s s  ...It of  factor  is fair  out.  itself  might  thus  t h e way p r o g r a m s s u c h a s With  an enormous  specific  'variety  regard  to  and q u a l i t y ' i n  the country:  t o s a y t h a t t h e r e a r e a number  e x c e p t i o n a l programs  and  cultural  the  system, but they  institutions  the system  areas  i n v o c a t i o n a l , academic  which a r e a v a i l a b l e  within  are sparsely located.  In some  no e d u c a t i o n a l p r o g r a m s a r e o f f e r e d . . .  (1979, p . 2)  The federal and  vastness and  and  those  existence example, of must  provincial  integration  inevitable.  worth  But  i t  which  i f certain and  to achieve.  i s important  differences of  p r i s o n s might  a r e hard  be p r o v i d e d  t o do s o .  of the r e g i o n and the j u d i c i a l  which  is  can  unfair  Some d i f f e r e n c e s to distinguish be  to  are provided  between  e x p l a i n why c o - o r d i n a t i o n  avoided,  will  between the  as t o a  good  there  these  For  education  i n some p e n i t e n t i a r i e s ,  a l l prisoners, unless  be  continued  p r i s o n e r s as persons.  o p p o r t u n i t i e s , such  value  split  i s good r e a s o n  they not  26  Conf1icts Another  s i t u a t i o n w h i c h m i g h t have  implementation between  the  of education purported  Ouimet Committee R e p o r t in dealing  are of  also  and w i t h  (Ekstedt, looking  1984,  According  major  conflicts  'the o t h e r  the  staff  initiative  as a  the  conflict  are involved  and  between  corrections  1986, p . 1 0 ) .  There  f o r s e c u r i t y and c o n t r o l ' officers  control  i n helping  responsibility'  for  o f aims  the r e h a b i l i t a t i v e goals  Correctional and  In 1969, t h e  to the c o n f l i c t  problem  concerns  custody  possible  incarceration.  called attention  p. 185).  after  treatment  of  is  upon t h e  Law Review W o r k i n g Paper Two,  apparently  prison  goals  with offenders  (Correctional  programs  some i n f l u e n c e  are  usually  of the inmates  inmates  (Ekstedt,  develop 1984,  while 'self-  p. 2 2 2 ) .  t o Hudson:  ...Conflict  between c o n c e r n s  c u s t o d y and i n s t i t u t i o n a l  for security,  maintenance  o inevitably quality  override  c o n c e r n s about t h e  of the e d u c a t i o n a l  programs  provided...  (1981, p . 166) Miller with  also  other  thinks  lack  education  correctional interests'  Another and  that  attendant  will  a l w a y s have  to  'compete  (1978, p . 2 3 5 ) .  and r e l a t e d problem might  o f p o s i t i v e d i r e c t i o n among t h e s e  goals  ...Over t h e y e a r s a number o f g o a l s f o r  be t h e c h a n g e s themselves:  27  c o r r e c t i o n s have s e e n reflecting the  basic  different points philosophy  (Task F o r c e ,  This  Report  and  usually  found  legislation The  issues  planning  characteristic  t h e y a r e seldom processes'  of  policy  'integrated  (p. 10), reports  i s o l a t e s 'the l a c k  p. 12)  and  need t a c k l i n g .  (p. 12).  whether  being  into more  rather  than i n  clear  program  (p. 12).  ...Each p r o g r a m  felt  programs' as  varied  responses  that  there  were ' t o o  t o enable  anyone  was a ' c o h e r e n t and c o n s i s t e n t  A similar story  i s told  by t h e CSC:  i n i t s own way i s a monument  to  some p r o b l e m o f t h e p a s t ,  an  ad-hoc  basis  many  program approaches'  c o n c l u d e whether o r n o t t h e r e strategy'  within  t h e CSC had a c l e a r progam  A g r o u p of p e r s o n s within  of a  'instability  Apparently  t o the question  many c o n t r a d i c t i o n s  program  a  i n t e x t b o o k s and c o m m i t t e e  (1985,  were o b t a i n e d  to  should be...  or binding d i r e c t i v e s .  that  strategy  in  that  i s that  Sawatsky Report  strategy'  o f v i e w on what  1984, p . 10)  goals  programs or  of day,  of c o r r e c t i o n s  i s of the o p i n i o n  statements the  the l i g h t  and t a r g e t t e d  without  much r e f e r e n c e  address  s i m i l a r problems...  often  d e s i g n e d on  t o a s i n g l e problem  to other  programs t h a t  may  (1985, p . 3)  According change'  which  t o t h e Sawatsky R e p o r t , has o c c u r r e d  over  the  the l a s t  'continuous twenty  five  program y e a r s has  28  been  detrimental  For  example,  felt.  But  'programs  impact just  are  constant  of changes  when  'an  changed  changeover  breathing  space  effectiveness. can  t o i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f programs  is  equilibrium  good  interest  A n o t h e r drawback  illustration  away  from  incarceration. development (Cosman,  reform  of  the  of the  that  no  of program objectives  Services  (Task  u s e d t o be an e a r l y  1985,  p. 3 ) .  Today  p..183), but f e l l  into disfavour  Working  Today, offenders  with and  rehabilitative  On  could  of  of  spiritual  purpose'  of  the  i s hardly  mentioned.  word  reaffirmed  Fauteux  Committee  i n t h e 1970's  1986, p . 2 0 ) .  opportunities social ideal  to  skills.'  prisons  with  the  (Ekstedt,  1984,  (Correctional  This attitude  conducive  topic  i s dominant.  'improve It  of t r a n s f o r m i n g  (Correctional the  goals  Law  currently  circles.  environment  responsible 11).  some  terms  as  'central  t h e ' O p p o r t u n i t i e s Model'  vocational  an  Paper One,  among  in  officially the  be t h e s h i f t o f  rehabilitation  Reform--especially  of  prevails  problem might  and  recommendations  Model  is  i s that c o r r e c t i o n a l  of t h i s  was  p.  result  programming  force'  Rehabilitation  with  and  reached,'  1984, p . 1 0 ) .  A  Review  been  f o r thorough assessment  seldom become t h e ' d r i v i n g  Force,  has  Another negative  policy  allowed  p. 13).  c a n t a k e months o r y e a r s t o be  again.'  in  (1985,  o f change,  be m o d i f i e d a r e a l r e a d y  moves  their  hints  to providing  Paper  that  present  from  learning  Working  provides  educational,  away  prisoners  to  Law Review  their  It  how One,  the them t o be 1986,  the O p p o r t u n i t i e s  (Task  Force,  1984,  29  p.  11).  It  is  encouragement  felt  that  be  given  should  more  active  prisoners  motivation  to  and  participate  in  programs. Another skills. more  current  This  i s part  responsibly  Training 'highest  priority  Sawatsky  for  literacy,  ' be  corrections education between  can  the  standards  cause  of  as  being  either. the  fact  attended the will  very  a  Some  The  incarceration  are.  do  2)  recommends  the  literacy,  for increased  be  drawn  exist the  of  and  it  i s not  after  quality  other  be  is  while funding  which  may  policies  on  what  conflict  totally  the  might  be  due  to  to  be Thus  attention paid i t  other  a t t e n t i o n must be  as  satisfactory,  priority,  the  in  then,  have been s e t t l e d .  w e l l as  of  provided.  labelled,  a  within  especially  of p r o g r a m s  considered matters  and  of  implementation  exist  fairly  influence  direction  seen as e x i s t i n g  as  what  penitentiary  shifting  not  education  But  of  co-ordination  cannot  of t h e p r o b l e m s  depend  and  compulsory.  Differences  d i s a r r a y , but  p r o v i s i o n of  always  lack  education  only  i t be  live  Education  g o a l s might a l s o a f f e c t  that education to  calls  literacy  The  l a c k of p u r p o s e and  implementation  in total  34)  example,  education.  Penitentiary  p.  of  prisoners to  functional  p i c t u r e can  For  various  programs such  that  situations  programs.  teaching  CHAPTER  accurate  programs.  the  (1985,  upon  (1985, p.  THE  certain  CSC  placed  recommending  no  on  i d e a of e q u i p p i n g  the  Report  Although  education  the  is  self-sufficiently.  of  CONCLUSION TO  education,  of  and  Division  the  emphasis  concerns  paid education,  of for  30  while  education  nevertheless some o f  the  logical  is  84).  attempts  the  of  prisoners  those  offenders,  the  are helps  They w i l l  not  importance,  no  Security  allowed,  other  viewed a  able  i n danger  of  reintegration  strengthening  of b e i n g  not  their  the  is  into thus  lives.  to  shelved  in  education  of i n c a r c e r a t i o n . serves,  for  development  of  short, a  legal  right  the  truncated,  lessened  or  or p o l i c i e s of  the  aside  the  also  two  goals  protected  community  facilitate to  p e r s o n s who  are  the  those  prime  both  not  other  helping  the  might  be  through  as  in  be.  They s h o u l d  push  to  system.  might  offender  especially  opportunities  releasing  rights  programs w i t h i n  or  the  1980,  upheld.  be  i s understandable.  society  can  In  custody  s o c i e t y . ' Indeed,  by  'reflect  legal  personal  goals  incarceration,  prisoners'  things with  the  dominate,  of o f f e n d e r s  society  the  I t would g u a r a n t e e  education  This  to  Education  indeed,  (Baxendale,  claim will  i n view.  s o c i e t y and  for  to  it  facilitates  p u r p o s e s which e d u c a t i o n  m a t t e r what o t h e r of  as  whole'  to  goals.  those  stabilize  're-enter  intertwined,  other  incarceration,  is  d i r e c t e d at  however,  considerations  protects  being  incarceration.  citizens.  of  It  i n p r i s o n s must t h e r e f o r e be  always kept  be  incarceration,  c h a n g e s made i n p r i o r i t i e s  goals  education  offender  goals  of  incarceration.  would e n s u r e t h a t e d u c a t i o n  would ensure t h a t  of  of  education  t o c a r r y out  example,  a goal  c u s t o d i a l regime as  a place despite  be  interest  I t s prominence  education  foci  represent  f u n c t i o n s and  Thus,  It  not  an  purpose  purpose of p.  may  the  law-abiding goals—through  resist  crime,  have l e a r n e d  to  it do  31  There  are  institution Apart not  be  at  retain  of  their  achieving  prisoner's component  importance.  of t h a t g o a l  more l a w - a b i d i n g goal  has  why  review  that other  goals, crime.  has  of  mainly  by  Education  I t has  changes  been  mentioned  in terminology.  should the  should  incarceration a  way  augmenting  a  incarceration.  keys t o a b e n e f i c i a l  term,  how  I t has  as  the  aside.  There  i s thus  the  of  the  indicated  been s u g g e s t e d  m e n t i o n e d , however, t h a t no m a t t e r one  laid  harmony  has  goals  of  as  a  central  of h e l p i n g p r i s o n e r s r e t u r n t o s o c i e t y as  citizens.  undergone  Our  Education  to  reason  t o overshadow o t h e r s .  other  resistance  security  g o a l s must be  no  goals.  goals  of e n s u r i n g  the  when o t h e r  between  these  when  is actually  security  then,  times  stake,  there  possible  a way,  of  is  from t h i s ,  propensity be  perhaps  education  such  a  a l s o been remains  32  III. The to  dissertation  education  against rights  for prisoners.  i n general.  issues  and  t h e use of ' r i g h t ' address  I.  three  What  a r e made?  understood  associated  with  right. t h a t must be c o n f r o n t e d  right  to education  i n many c i r c u m s t a n c e s .  as i t occurs  itself.  My c o n c e r n i s  i n 'X h a s t h e r i g h t  to  Y.'  questions.  i s expected  This  problems  right  t h e r e f o r e aims t o :  the s p e c i f i c  c a n be c l a i m e d  for a legal  c a n be b e t t e r  the issues/problems  to understand  Rights  the case  right  This chapter  Illuminate  order  I will  This  F i n d o u t t h e meaning o f a  b)  with  aims t o a s s e s s  a background of  a)  in  BACKGROUND REVIEW OF RIGHTS  by whom and o f whom when s u c h  i s discussed  in  the  section  entitled,  claims " The  N a t u r e and M e a n i n g o f R i g h t s . " II. the  What  different  logically different  This  i s examined  kinds  kinds  in  of r i g h t s  of rights  are there?—that i s ,  w h i c h may  the s e c t i o n e n t i t l e d ,  be  claimed.  " C a t e g o r i z a t i o n of  Rights." III. claim?  What r e a s o n s Because  does n o t c l a i m section I.  rights  rights  entitled,  or grounds place  without  can  be  given  f o r such  s e r i o u s b u r d e n s upon p e o p l e , one  justification.  This  i s the  " J u s t i f i c a t i o n of Rights."  THE NATURE AND MEANING OF RIGHTS  T h e s e c a n be e x p l a i n e d  f r o m two p o i n t s  A.  That  of the r i g h t - h o l d e r  B.  That  of other  right-holder  a  p e r s o n s who i n t e r a c t  of view:  with the  third  33  A.  RIGHTS FROM THE  1.  R i g h t s and  Freedom rights to  do  things  things. refer  In  to  the  (rights  Action  rights  that  us  with.  we  legitimately  to  (that  then,  right  It  be  such  of  receive  t h i s allowance.  to  provide  i t b e c a u s e of  are,  other. possible  legitimate  to to  circumstantially  that be  two  to  question, hold  the  X,  that  the  right  one  free  to  a  respect  to  suggested  their  the  right  right  is,  A  to  to  the  cannot  for say  notion  For has  of  these  example,  that  to  receive what  remain d i f f e r e n t  right  exercise  when it.  or one This  expect it. action  from  causes problems. whether  has  expecting  of  understanding  are  i f one  grounds f o r  persons  of  describing  o t h e r s must  to  do  out.  example, has  the  same t i m e ,  freedom a l s o  one  will  expectations—which  concepts  for  I and  be  is  A has  right.  however, c e n t r a l  rights  it  say  X  have  At  the  a l t h o u g h the  Linking  i t might  in understanding  insurance,  to  rights  X),  With  however, a p p r o p r i a t e  rights  persons certain  rights,  rights.  do  carrying  things  "Categorization,"  i s more a p p r o p r i a t e  possession  is,  to  main  receive  Act ion  I f we  free  to  whatever  seems u s e f u l  It  as  t o do  do  into  unemployment  Freedom  do)  on  Recipient  to  i s not,  rights.  to  to  the  sometimes a l l o w s  them  section  restriction.  coerced  by  a  'free'  right  allows  is, rights  be  legitimized  Having a  r e c e i v e ) as  must  of  of  (rights  A  possessors  one  following  rights.  Rec i p i e n t  been s u g g e s t e d a s  the  Freedom, action  RIGHT-HOLDER  sometimes  without  mean  THE  and  p e r s o n s were  permits, X,  often  former  latter  VIEW OF  Freedom  has  provide  POINT OF  not  each  It  is  it  is  might dispute  not is  34  sometimes e x p r e s s e d  as  Formal  and  rights.  morally  has a r i g h t ,  Actual  arising  from  It  is  but i s unable  the asked,  t o s a y one has t h e r i g h t ?  Bentham  would  like  p.  I am p e r s u a d e d  44).  sometimes  are  mean t h a t  not  freedom  normally expects The has  argument  proved  make t h i s  to  actually  cannot from  a  that  be  Because  part  of  only  troublesome  fulfilment  thought  provision  dependency  upon o n e ' s f r e e d o m .  where  the  that  right-holder  t h e r e cannot  T h i s way o f t h i n k i n g education can  be  seen  in  unhindered are  to possess  that  what  one  does n o t  usually  right-holders  such  by  rights  others  upon  of  that  other  And b e c a u s e  fails  is  t h e r e can  themselves.  be  no  suggests a  rights  can  freedoms,  exist i t is  to education.  to recognize  right.  unwilling  claim  and  persons  that  t h i s dual nature, that  or persons  usually  resources  acquires certain  A right both  t o a d v i c e and r e s o u r c e s .  can s t i l l  or  rights  some i n s t a n c e s , c a n i n v o l v e access  we  i n d i s c u s s i o n s about  of  be a r i g h t  and a r e c i p i e n t  unavailable,  educate  fact  a  right  c a n i m p l y b o t h n o n - i n t e r f e r e n c e and p r o v i s i o n .  b o t h an a c t i o n least  The  rights  i t h a s sometimes been t h o u g h t  restriction  ( i n C r a n s t o n , 1967,  t o be ' r e a l '  facilities,  This  such as  r i g h t s must be a c t u a l  upon  right.  Some w r i t e r s ,  t o a c t on o u r r i g h t  dependent  such  the  is i t  contrary.  free a  then  the rule  i t ,  right.  particularly  to education.  the  between  i f one l e g a l l y o r  to exercise  not m e a n i n g l e s s  to  difference  Within prisons,  Rights  i s , t h e y c a n be  to education,  freedom Thus  at  t o s t u d y and if  to provide active  t h e freedom  to  resources support,  t o do what t h e y c a n t o  assuming  that  authorities  35  do  not wish  prisoners'  t o supply programs to p r i s o n e r s , right  to  help  seek  willing  to  courses,  or the r e c e i v i n g  Compulsory attendance notion was  for of  education  do,  freedom lack  free  is  to other r i g h t s  right  to e d u c a t i o n .  A  is itself  show t h a t  right  An  right  and  that  is  thus as  of r i g h t s  upon someone e l s e  of t h i s  our  right,  compelling our  right  often  of  have a d u t y  as w i t h a d u t y consideration. must  take a  this  be of  their  supposedly  enjoy  This  i s that  performance  can  cannot  certain  paternalistic  t h e n do  follows.  right  we  levels  young  o f t h i s might  others  that  one  supposedly  For these,  children  have t o w a r d  the  that  be  not  have  that  only  i s too g e n e r a l .  a corollary  claim  the  r e s p o n s e might  The  t o freedom.  Sometimes, t h e d u t y we  possible  was  found a t primary  implication  response  p l a c e s a duty  to  to s t a t e  One  be  compulsory  contradict  one  limited.  to stating  Such a c l a i m  better  that  t o do.  responsibility,  i s equivalent  a d u l t s do.  will  t o choose  such as the o b v i o u s  attitude  something  might  mail.  The  to  I t seems odd  impede  correspondence  issue. seem  who  the  i s , e d u c a t i o n f o r the young.  e x p e r i e n c e and  rights  through  another  education i s usually  that  through  literature  to education.  and  compulsory  education,  example,  of p e r s o n s a t s c h o o l s does  of a r i g h t  to  that  a  e d u c a t i o n from p e r s o n s  being coerced into doing  free  a  them,  they cannot  which  But  to respect means duty.  something  instance,  position. rights  next  of d u t i e s .  But  and  section Having  our  they  right. have  a  i t is also  which  r e p r e s e n t s a more  In s u c h an  secondary  nature.  t o do  The  obstructs  superior  and  the e x e r c i s e  of  Moral  duties  duties,  are  although  36  interrelated, s u c h as  i n the  same t i m e If  the  i n s t a n c e of a d u t y  duty  to  factor  must p r e v a i l anyone who to  separate e n t i t i e s ,  as h a v i n g a r i g h t  important  it  are  be  the r i g h t .  so needs t o be  independent  of  society  and  not  yet  education,  because  claim they  is  considered  one's d e c i s i o n s ,  i t can be  themselves  citizens/persons. to  existing  at  the  as  a  more  then t h i s  duty  In t h e c a s e of t h e v e r y young,  responsible ready  co-exist,  educated.  educated,  to educate  t h u s t h e y can  t o be e d u c a t e d  educated  in influencing  over  society  t o be  and  said  in order that  contribute  to  its  Young c h i l d r e n may  the  first  that  full  freedom  have t o honour  or  they  owe  they can progress  be  their  as  regarded  of t h e i r  right  duty  to  be  as to be  educated. As  the  chapter  does not mean we integral be  no  component  restrictions  compelling  will  Freedom  of r i g h t s ,  the f a c t  priorities.  example, p a r t i c i p a t i o n The  example,  reiterated  work,  and  (Dennison, ability  1977  to  them w i t h t h e programs  freedom,  reason, freedom  the  prisoners  that  remains there  presence are  rights  should 1).  that be  education  might  of  more  concerned,  for their  able  Prisoners  are  was  equivalent  to  to choose  between t h e  two  persons  and  make d e c i s i o n s and  to  choose  rights,  an  o f t h e P a r l i a m e n t a r y Sub-Committee, f o r  i s only to respect  Associating  or  still  our  i n e d u c a t i o n programs s h o u l d r e m a i n  the view  p.  despite  Where  Report  inmates 1979,  not e x e r c i s i n g  l o n g e r have them.  upon t h i s  choice.  show s o o n ,  to  them as  action  who  choices.  participate  in  have  the  Providing education  persons.  r i g h t s at l e a s t ,  with a  concept  37  like  freedom  unavoidable. implying, this  ...A  to  they  provide being  Hart  and  active  some  free  i t  seems  right  freedom  without  to  (1976) p u t s  enjoy  i t aptly:  t o do~X...  the concept  (1979,  either  Wellman  (1980),  of r i g h t  p. 17) s e e s  t o suggest  would be  out of the  context  connection  o f human f r e e d o m . '  as primary  t h e freedom  i t  an e s s e n t i a l  distribution  I  f e a t u r e s of r i g h t s ,  t o do, o r t h e e x p e c t a t i o n t o  or both. indicated certain  i n chapter  one, a  education is  This  i s an i m p o r t a n t  the  freedom  of  ways, a s a r e s u l t  right  to  education  would  a d v a n t a g e s t o p r i s o n e r s , a s compared w i t h o n l y as a s e r v i c e that  efforts  f e a t u r e because  prisoners of t h e i r  or p r i v i l e g e .  p r i s o n e r s would a t l e a s t  demand n o n - i n t e r f e r e n c e i n t h e i r  If  an  Flathman  of f r e e ,  and a ' c e r t a i n  advantages  2.  has  that X has  (1979)  Hart  imply  granted  these  X  Yet  t o do X and t h e r e f o r e  to understand  rights  receive,  problems.  meaningless.  therefore, like  As  that  ideally,  appears  freedom.  between  some  145)  difficult  that  state  i s , i n some s e n s e  According  would,  create  has a r i g h t  (p.  of  To  at least  right,  he  does  will  their  One  of  be a b l e t o  t o o b t a i n an e d u c a t i o n .  i t must be remembered  a l r e a d y be c u r t a i l e d  that  i n other  incarceration.  R i g h t s and C h o i c e the r i g h t h o l d e r i s free  right-holder  has a c h o i c e  to exercise a  right,  then  the  r e g a r d i n g t h e e x e r c i s e of the r i g h t .  38  This  large  element  of  individual  s i n g l e most d i s t i n c t i v e f e a t u r e p.  71).  It  something p.  is  that  odd  one  to  discretion  of  state  cannot  the  concept'  that  c h o o s e not  is  one to  the  (Flathman,  has  do'  'perhaps  ' a  1976,  right  to  (Flathman,  do  1976,  76). Flathman  decision,  on  discharge  also the  with  obligations,  can  difference  no  to  My  and  would  not  they  are  to  but  criticism decision  (p.  Thus,  to  given.  t o c h o o s e not And  This  being  has  the  right,  to  persons,  if  imposition  them.  and  in  the  that  f o r the  obligated,  the  do  of  f o r him  the  is  compelled. do  But  i t even when  the When  i f there  discharging  t o do  so,  if  one  with  r i g h t s , one  p e r s o n s who  right  so  and  sanctions  these  because the  i s emphasizing  a  do  resent  finds must  be  prisoners  nevertheless discharge  discharge  Such  and  possible  to discharge  who  obligations,  unwarranted.  is  i s imagining  they  refusing  present  compelled.  p e r h a p s what F l a t h m a n of  be  have t o honour  s o m e t h i n g , one  'respect'  think  It  inadequate.  right-holders, they  do  i s able  difficulty  because  t h o s e who  justification  one  c h o i c e must  justification  refuse  justification  obligated,  as  the  valid  obligations, the  of  between b e i n g  i s compelled  is  part  that  obligations.  dissatisfied  one  states  one  can  one  obligations.  one  has  Despite  still  choose  however,  does  is  One  c o m p e l s them t o .  i s that  obligations.  choice, if  law  obligations  unable  to  the  the to  But  choice  fact  that  find  expose  them  one  explain  to  one's  77). for  persons  who  have  to  facilitate  the  right  to  39  education the If  for prisoners, ideally,  right,  a c c e p t i n g the o b l i g a t i o n  prepared  Flathman, 3.  to face  they  those  form  of advantages  We  others  might  should  ...If  have  to  respect  no need  to  - f o r the r i g h t h o l d e r are  the  no one e l s e  usually  right  by  in  the  f o r some  giving  up  so  much  as  that  rights:  by X,  f o r doing  would be an empty  one c l a i m s  there i t and t o  gesture...  not only  b u t more, one c l a i m s with  necessary--that  rightholders  i s , as a r e c i p i e n t  consequences  of  the a c t i v e  that by  certain providing  rights,  especially  f o r o t h e r s , c a n be s t a t e d a s b e i n g  has  that  the p a r t of o t h e r s '  rights  'generate  (Montagu,  right  t o engage  others the  should  resources  right.  consequences been s a i d  on a d e s e r t  1976, p . 80)  education,  co-operate  say, alone  claiming rights  i s affected  f o r a warrant  a right  education,  for rights,  acknowledge these  (Flathman,  The  according  f o r r i g h t h o l d e r s , and d i s a d v a n t a g e s  have  no need  claim  in  however,  These c o n s e q u e n c e s  Thus we a r e n o t j u s t  is  from t h e r i g h t .  to the r i g h t - h o l d e r . would  island.  consequences,  engender c o n s e q u e n c e s  around him.  something  as a r i s i n g  for  and Consequences  also  o t h e r s who  With  the  do so o u t o f r e s p e c t  need n o t do s o .  Rights  Rights and  they  corresponding  1980,  p. 3 7 2 ) .  in  terms  obligatory.  of It  o b l i g a t i o n s on The  nature  of  40  these  o b l i g a t i o n s - sometimes termed d u t i e s  essential  to  the  discussed  in a  separate  C h a p t e r s one the  citizens  position  the  of  to  obligations  prisoners  two  others  make  Rights  and  rights.  suggested  for  t o do  to  to  of  anything,  things of  let  are  They w i l l  be  prisoners—like  This  penitentiary there  are  hardly  alone  f o r them.  education,  it  that  (1979) N o w h e r e s v i l i e ,  direction  right  study  have  "bargain"  on  i s no  and  and  -  section.  Feinberg's  uncertain  there  meaning  or c o r o l l a r i e s  to  in a  impose  may  explain  education.  Because  are  no  grounds  o b l i g a t o r y upon.others to  improve  for their  education. 4.  Rights this  may  use  the  also  never  Protection  protect  occur,  fact  of  the  our  Consider  found  and  are  the  point  paradigms leave  of  point  is  (1976, p.  96).  with a sphere 5.  65).  to as  an  rights.  The  'raison  d'etre'  It of  i s suggested,  protection and  are  They a r e  They  interference  'protection  of  of of  While  They have  that  possible  in  been fact,  circumstances  by  others,  a  right  rights,  can  unwarranted  offer,  unpopular  then,  against  from  Because t h e i r  protection  the  us  example.  incarcerated. of  threat.  when t h r e a t e n e d , we  protect  the  Rights  Rights  i s that  require  interference. suggests,  i n t e r f e r e n c e , or  prisoners  them open t o u n w a r r a n t e d  particularly  p.  from  rights  interference. guilty  us  they from  as  forms of  rights  may such  Flathman action'  provide  us  encroachment.  Society  also  a  'social  phenomenon'  'people-oriented'  (Flathman,  (Flathman, 1976,  p.  1976, 80).  41  They  must  practice, the  be and  part binds  respect  Prisoners still  human  cannot,  then,  communities  society, recent  and  ignore  them,  stated  benefits  other  are  they  s o c i e t y ' s p r a c t i c e of  much p a r t  still  education  part  of  system  same amount o f  of  rights  of  e f f e c t i v e i f they  are  fact  are  that  they  On  in getting can  be  Society  one  hand,  these  rights  implemented  a g i t a t i n g f o r them.  in At  a  f o r example, many p r o v i n c i a l  depended  r i g h t of  recognize of  nature  on  community  groups  to  prisoners.  of  as  the  rights.  involved  1987),  hand, the  to  acknowledges such a  been s t r e s s e d .  their  way  the  society  has  numbers s t a r t  that  for  or  (Feb.  be  The  persons  i s one  Conference  only  law.  u r g e d t o be  this  which  practices.  the  On  upon are  social  when s u f f i c i e n t  educators  part  r i g h t s can  beings  be  society  r u l e s which determine  have b r o k e n  for  CEA  obtain  For  within  can  recognized,  a  i t by  interaction.  accorded  of  the  rights.  this  fabric  society. other  attention  prisoners  right.  of  makes i t  The  education  members of  is a  obligatory  r i g h t s of  prisoners  much as  prisoners  s o c i e t y , as  Their  and  This  to education  i s also part  s o c i e t y , and  of  the  must m e r i t  the  consideration.  Summary 1.  Some r i g h t s p r o v i d e  us  with  certain  freedoms—action  r ights. 2. certain 3. those  Other goods or  rights  provide  us  with expectations  to  receive  services--recipient rights.  Right-holders discharging  are  free  to e x e r c i s e  their  rights,  o b l i g a t i o n s a l s o p o s s e s s a c e r t a i n amount  and of  42  freedom  in  choosing  whether  or  not  to  discharge  their  for others.  These  obligation. 4.  Rights  consequences and  always  are usually  disadvantages  corollaries  only  for  consequences  i n t h e way o f a d v a n t a g e s certain others.  for  holders,  These we w i l l  c a l l the  of r i g h t s .  5.  Rights  protect  6.  Rights  a r e always p a r t  us from i n t e r f e r e n c e . of a p r a c t i c e of r i g h t s ,  exist  w i t h i n a s o c i e t y which acknowledges  These  features are interrelated.  important  f e a t u r e s of r i g h t s ,  essential  especially  While there  In  section  rights  can  A,  i t was  freedom.  restrict  the  'essential  connection'  limitation  of  17).  This  one  other  are considered to  for prisoners.  RIGHTS FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF OTHER  with  may be  from c o n s i d e r i n g a r i g h t  B.  right-holders  and c a n  such a p r a c t i c e .  t h e ones d i s c u s s e d  t o the i s s u e s which a r i s e  education,  p.  have  stated This  between  person's  that a c t i o n  section  freedom  of  freedom then,  now  others.  rights  discussion centres,  PERSONS  and  rights  provide  discusses There 'the  how  i s an  justified  by a n o t h e r ' ( H a r t , 1979, on  the  corollaries  of  rights. It  might  corollaries, main  The  be a c c e p t e d  b u t what t h e s e  that  r i g h t s a r e a l w a y s a c c o m p a n i e d by  constitute i s often  disputed.  Two  perspectives are: 1.  That  r i g h t s must have d u t i e s a s c o r o l l a r i e s  2.  That  r i g h t s c a n have  two  views  represent  corollaries  differing  other  opinions  than  duties  as t o which r i g h t s  43  are  authentic  'narrow'  rights.  The f i r s t  view  view--only to d i f f e r e n t i a t e  can  be  described  i t from t h e l a t t e r  as  a  'broad'  view. B o t h v i e w s h i n g e upon  'duty.'  Sometimes i t i s u s e d a s a g e n e r i c on  other  The  ' narrow  the  latter  in  this  carry with  occasions  are 'really'  special some  action.  a s a d u t y , and t h u s , said not  to  have  always  only  accepted  t y p e of c o r o l l a r y .  which  Speaking g e n e r a l l y ,  as  view,  obligation  demanding t o  the person could  i s why sometimes  'full'  a duty to  merely not to i n t e r f e r e  i s not s u f f i c i e n t l y  This  imply d u t i e s of  with i t a s p e c i f i c  on t h e narrow  a right.  rights  An o b l i g a t i o n  someone's a c t i o n ( s )  ambiguously.  term t o c o v e r a l l c o r o l l a r i e s ;  rights.  sense c a r r i e s  i s used  t o one s p e c i a l  ' view h o l d s t h a t  kind  out  i t refers  'Duty'  rights,  action  and  count n o t be  rights are  are  termed  as  'liberties.' The  'narrow'  correlating are  quite  view  directly flexible  corollaries  whether  of  'narrow' broad  ' view  rights or  they  which  whether  elaborate  each  of  view.  are  non-interference,  allows  consequences  duties,  Some  provision  or  are  as long as ceases, f o r  prepared  duties.  rights  engender  for corollaries of r i g h t s  not  not  as always  philosophers  flexibility  are  o f t h o u g h t must a l w a y s  of r i g h t s  T h i s means t h a t  duties.  But h e r e t h e i r of r i g h t s ,  of  provision, school  thus sees r i g h t s  as t o the n a t u r e of these d u t i e s ,  t h e ' b r o a d ' view  accept  rights  with s p e c i f i c  they a r e seen as d u t i e s . unlike  of  other  than  acceptable  non-interference.  Thus,  for  duties.  to  this The '  duties. besides I  now  44  a)  The  'Narrow View'  In N a t u r a l and  duties  theory,  co-existed  as  example, a law  fulfil  his contract  A and  (Raphael,  view  duties  with  confers  1967,  that  p.  one.  r i g h t - h o l d e r s as Lyons  always  him  or  abstaining  established  or  granted*  incurred  the  other  only  by  rests  imperfect  has  perfect  r i g h t s - and  'the  a r i g h t to  limited  undertakings (p.  73). Discussion  law:  to  a B...  is  that  imposing  them,  someone is  by  that  of  else's imposing  rights  that  are  correlative duties  specific  fulfilment  in contrast  p e r s o n has  72).  to  Mayo f u r t h e r  duties  [italics]--including  and  rights  promises  of  the  to  give'  thinks  that  - occur  only  generated and  are  'so-called  a duty  thus c o r r e l a t i o n s with d u t i e s  class  considered  59).  persons,  (1967, p .  and  philosophers  58),  of 'it  r i g h t s where the  'no  by  (1979, p.  beneficiaries  (1979, p.  between r i g h t s  typified  to Lyons  saying  specific  r i g h t s ' where  rights  law  lays  hand, Mayo h o l d s  what one  in  a  A  this  correlativity It  from  'perfect'  upon  or B,  a  the  obligations  On  of  requires  B,  according  quotes  parcel  that  55).  is a traditional who,  commonly assumed  a r i g h t on  is  Bentham  right  which  there  duty.  and  f o r b i d s A to a s s a u l t  d u t y on  This  i t was  part  ...For  which  like  Law  by  contracts'  45  The claim  'narrow' view of  rights  p e r s o n s do  in  our  of  This  view  ...It is  of  but  then  to  l e t one  do  1979,  rights.  empty c l a i m This  is  view  79).  category  of  this  other  not  just  right,  we  are  t h e y comply  with  r i g h t s from  the  one  something,  obligations  with  as  it...  being  Following that  v i e w as no  Prisoners'  this,  the  to  basis  is  'due'  a l l corollaries  corollaries  specific  right  whatever  to  are  reject a  persons are education  always right  available could  be  to an  reason.  restricts and  r i g h t s to only  specifically of  that  obligations  section  receive  one  extent  s t a t i n g that  upon c a t e g o r i e s  following  p.  t o the  more r e a s o n a b l e ,  that  29).  (1979,  directly  that  anyone e l s e has  i t or p r o v i d e  for this  with various  that  p.  duties.  that  does  are  our  so  state  s o m e t h i n g , or  Many use  education,  r i g h t s : we  f o r c e of  upon o t h e r s  'duty'  'duties'  doubt  the  perceives  would be  correlate  claim  one  right-holder:  t o deny  else  the  Using  We  c l e a r even when d e s c r i b i n g  t o do  someone  bear  it.  will  was the  entitled  Feinberg  to  our  i t becomes o b l i g a t o r y  i s s e l f - c o n t r a d i c t o r y to  (Milne,  'due'  that  requests.  asserting  right.  point  order  something about  making p o l i t e actually  r i g h t s i s p l a u s i b l e because  will  with  r i g h t s w h i c h do various  those categories  kinds  not. of  i n d i f f e r e n t ways show  r i g h t a v a i l a b l e , and  that each  some  duty,  Lyons'  there  can  be  i s as  valid  p.  casting suggestion  rights will (1979,  which  correlate 59).  The  more t h a n  one  as  the  other.  46  'Rights' right to  'do  not  differ  than another'  be  a  prisoners' b)  appropriate  right  to  The  terms  to s p e c i f i c a  Rights  as  examples of significant termed as is to  a  to  corollaries  the  as  a d u t y , but  the  of  r i g h t s i n the  the  duty'  a  government  liberties 'no  have a s t r i c t  of  'not  categorizes  imply.  Only  corollary he  calls  held against and  of  (1976, p.  rather  to exceed  rise  terms  'liberties.' authority,  a  such as  'distinct  and  These cannot Although  'the the  are  not  perfectly  be  'there  present--mainly  these  as  nevertheless.  association,  44).  d u t i e s are  what  give  or what F l a t h m a n  s e n s e , however.  but  about  rights,  (1976,  w h i c h d o e s not  consideration  'not  specific general  a u t h o r i t y granted  to  45).  o b l i g a t o r y act  liberty'  a  seen  sense' would  liberties,  liberties,  i s important as  will  of be  a c t u a l l y represent  rights'  against' the  What  can  i n which c o r r e l a t i v e  (1976, p.  a  press,  strict  of  them'  liberties the  liberties  correlates of  is  such c o r o l l a r i e s  s p e e c h , of  legislate  more  (1976)  they  strict  Non-interference,  species  sense'  is This  the  Flathman  ' r i g h t s i n the  cites  how  88).  for  (1919),  which engender  f r e e d o m of  view  right  p.  Hohfeld  i s not  Flathman  1979,  one  view  duties.  'no-right'  no  education,  'broad'  according  Flathman  (Feinberg,  more  Following rights  in degree;  'the  that p.  regard  F l a t h m a n ' s view only  falls  39).  d i f f e r e n c e ' being  upon the  It  liberties  r e l a t i o n s h i p with  i s that  Bs  i s contrary as  rights,  specific  or  it  that  accepts there  is  Cs  through  A's  to the  'narrow'  view  because they  duties.  do  It i s also  not the  47  more to  significant  view  f o r the t h e s i s  e d u c a t i o n where t h e o n l y e x p e c t e d  right-holders  were  left  because  i t allows a  corollary  would  unrestrained in their  right  be  exercise  that of the  right. Lyons' there and  i s a direct duties,  against p.  obligation  (Lyons,  interfering  with  A has a r i g h t moral  obligations p.  52).  that  same  because  some A's d o i n g  correlate  which serve (  with  correlate  infer  there are rights or v i c e  Benn and P e t e r s While  performance  (1970,  owes A l v i n t e n  paid--specifically has a c o r r e s p o n d i n g  and o b l i g a t i o n  entail  others are prohibited  There  with  are  ordinary  as p r o t e c t i o n , Persons  when we do n o t have s u c h  do  obligations,  - held  T h i s r e p r e s e n t s a case of  rights.  T h i s s u p p o r t s the 'broad'  that  time  rights  from  some X, i t does n o t f o l l o w  t o do X (1972, p . 5 0 ) .  even  t o be  rights  'owed'  where B e r n a r d  where a ' r i g h t  just  sometimes  view.  the  or  of  that  1970, p . 4 6 ) .  prohibitions  logically  kinds  expected  specifically.  correlation  Lyons reasons  not  are  has a r i g h t  at  t o pay A l v i n  another'  and  duties  Bernard  'determinate'  He a r g u e s  v e r s a - i n cases of s t r i c t  T h i s means A l v i n  Bernard.  one  vice  between c e r t a i n  He p o s t u l a t e s a s i t u a t i o n  dollars.  a  and  correlation  o t h e r s , where  47).  by  (1970) i d e a s a r e a k i n t o F l a t h m a n ' s .  view,  then.  under  because  there  such  ( L y o n s , 1979,  Although  d u t i e s or o b l i g a t i o n s ,  just  legal  b u t w h i c h do  are  rights  that  are  rights  we  cannot  duties  or  versa. (1959,  seeing  of d u t i e s , '  p . 88) a r e s u p p o r t e r s o f t h e b r o a d e r  rights  as  they agree  being that  'conditional  upon t h e  these d u t i e s can  either  48  be  of  'active  (1959, p. Kerr can  89).  also  of  p.  duties  being  Hart such  as  interfere' generate  specific  strict  interference  consider It  not  interference  as  corollaries therefore,  to  "General" everyone, the  constitute This  the  a  a  interfere,  (1978, p.  for  I  to  of  167). duties, (1979,  contracts,  'general'  right  held  'not  to  (which  s i m i l a r to Flathman's  rights  s i m i l a r to Flathman's that  am  or  of  non-  concept  F l a t h m a n does  not  more  (1976)  having  I  and  which  I will  term  not  have other  the  chosen,  views  'duties') on  nonin  constitute  call  impact  we  interested  education.  (these  which, although  out  or  (1979) " s p e c i a l " r i g h t s  whether  corollaries  others  rights  duty.  Flathman  which active  and  others,  other  do  not  active participation. way  of  why  a  right  example) be  a  r i g h t even  explain  as  right  follow  by  upon  rights, incurring duties are  is.  'special rights'  d i f f e r e n c e being  duty,  between  participation  are  important  a  of  distinguish  corollaries  so  that  is a correlative obligation  Hart's  non-interference is  to  arise  distinguishes  23).  sense.  liberties—with  attendant  not  as  which  obligations)  against  sense,  something  persons,  where t h e r e  (1979, p.  duties  to provide  non-interference'  generic  obligated  rights  also  a l l men,  the  least,  r i g h t s which always c o r r e l a t e with  Examples are  against  of  being  'at  i n the  that  specific  He  or  'duty'  obligated  against  20).  the  of  categorizes  agreements.  in  They use  seems t o a c c e p t  include  duties  performance,'  dealing to  with  education though  corollaries can  (for  i t imposes  no  will  e n a b l e me  autodidacts, duty  on  others  to for (in  49  Flathman's allow  me  [1976] term,  to argue  that  if  non-interference  be  made a v a i l a b l e and  others  to  short,  can  provide  r i g h t s as  i n the  liberties).  c a s e of  education  is insufficient,  then  that,  duties  it.  therefore,  The  have b o t h a d u t y  r i g h t of of  Yet  it will  for  prisoners,  resources must  prisoners  p r o v i s i o n and  also  etc.,  be  must  placed  on  to education,  a c o r o l l a r y of  in non-  interference. CONCLUSION TO Rights form  of  what  the  other  NATURE AND  always give  from d o i n g . of  "THE  others  Rights,  are  i t s being  we  RIGHTS"  to c o r o l l a r i e s . expected  however, a r e  justification  than  rise  MEANING OF  can  t o do  These a r e  f o r us,  authenticated  offer.  someone's d u t y  They can t o do  on  or  in  to  the  exist  refrain strength  for  something,  the  reasons  and  vice  versa. It  is  improved has  claim that  necessary,  might might  through d i s c u s s i o n them, t o discussion  are  allowed  rights  call  because they  freedoms  are  ensure  that  be  they  providing  at  non-interference the  show has  the  for. are  already allowed  the  been shown  same  time,  of  how  i t .  This  to  to  ensure  whatever  is particularly  important  t o engage  certain A in  a  valid  i f n e c e s s a r y and  of  r i g h t would education  from n o n - i n t e r f e r e n c e . be  a  practise  restricted.  freedom  and  such  r i g h t s do  i n a p o s i t i o n where being  be  section  what r i g h t s a r e ,  shown t h a t  This  might  well-founded  freedom  least protection has  education  r i g h t to c l a i m  The  action  At  the  be.  prisoners,  rights.  had  penitentiary  with  their  by  that  do  rightholders  their for  i f prisoners  been  what we  maintained  This  corollary  possible,  of  rights  50  would  also  required  impose o b l i g a t i o n s  action  It  t o implement  has a l s o  entities,  and  relationship exist.  i f often  A.  take  the  to  each  R i g h t s and d u t i e s to  observe a duty  be  are separate other,  this  can a l s o c o -  educated  at the  t o be e d u c a t e d .  CATEGORIZATION OF RIGHTS Identification  Rights relevant  can  be  categories  classified  in  many d i f f e r e n t ways.  INALIENABLE AND CONTINGENT RIGHTS  2.  ACTION AND RECIPIENT RIGHTS  3.  LEGAL AND MORAL RIGHTS  4.  HUMAN AND PERSON RIGHTS the thesis,  explicating  what would  I will  make u s e of t h e s e d i s t i n c t i o n s  be i n v o l v e d  Explication  1.  INALIENABLE AND CONTINGENT RIGHTS  i ) Can n e v e r ii)  rights are rights  'absolute.'  ...no  choose  We c a n n e v e r w a i v e ,  rights  have  This  matter  which:  be t a k e n away f r o m us  We c a n a l w a y s  iii)  in  i n a right to education.  B.  Inalienable  Four  are:  1.  Throughout  These  related  t o have a r i g h t  same t i m e a s one must a l s o II.  r i g h t s and d u t i e s  not n e c e s s a r y .  I t i s possible  to  the r i g h t .  been n o t e d t h a t  even  is  upon t h o s e c o n c e r n e d  been  means  not t o e x e r c i s e or t r a n s f e r  also  described  as ' i m p r e s c r i p t i b l e , '  that:  what t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s may  51  be,  a person  justified and  possessing  is fully  i n denying  him, h i s r i g h t . . .  1977, p . 1)  Some p h i l o s o p h e r s right  a right  i n demanding, a s s e r t i n g o r e x e r c i s i n g ,  o t h e r s a l w a y s wrong  (Melden,  such  to l i f e  view human r i g h t s  as i n a l i e n a b l e ,  and c i t e t h e  a s an example.  Discussion This category traditionally is  important  criterion  life, as  been  for  has a  long  rights  were i n a l i e n a b l e ,  concept  criticism. rights  circumstances'  does  not  they  criticized.  rights.  or  Hobbes  'coercion  a  right  but  or  a of  one  beings'  history  who  cannot that  value' in  p. 573). is  Daniels be  right,  of s c a t h i n g  the n o t i o n of  doctrine,'  valid  restraint'  rather  as  notion  was  I t i s now b e i n g  right  1968,  (1979, p . 1 5 ) .  mean  circumstances,'  or  It  1967, p . 1 8 ) .  'mindless  absolutely  (Nielsen,  used  The  were human  (Polin,  a  have  as that t o t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n of  1977, p . 2 ) .  i s any s p e c i f i c  'unconditionally  circumstances  as  (Melden,  there  sometimes  rights  sometimes  a l s o had a p a r a l l e l  inalienable  idea'  'whether  human  Some p h i l o s o p h e r s have begun t o r e g a r d  being  absurd  of  such  nature  has  is  history.  because  w e l l as p a r t of t h e i r  way  and c o n s e q u e n t l y  authenticity  that c e r t a i n  This  major  inalienability  the  rights  a  addressed,  because  inalienable claimed  represents  can  be  a l l conceivable thinks  'justified'  by  t h a t such  'abrogated  ' i t is  'an  questioned  which  Hart  suggests  and  always  that special a claim  under  any  relevant in  52  deciding the  what one ought  right' The  i t  inalienable states, it  is  whether  in order  to  rights  sometimes  'the s t a t u s  has  yield  to merit  i)  We  t o 'other  rights have  circumstance, are,  the person  I will  of r i g h t s  who h a s  rights  important  have  to  But a s  be  Melden  just  because  (1972, p . 4 9 3 ) . I  maintain  whenever  the  i s raised.  which:  result  such as the r o l e s  therefore,  rights  considerations'  which  a  that  is  i s 'not compromised'  are rights as  inalienable  r e g a r d as genuine.  of r i g h t s '  of the a u t h e n t i c i t y  Contingent  are  proposed  a d h e r e t o s u c h an o p i n i o n , question  with  (1977, p. 1 ) .  question  because  t o do i n d e a l i n g  of  that  a  we  particular are  which  are  waive  according  context,  assigned.  dependent  upon  These  extraneous  factors. ii)  We c a n l o s e  situation, iii) These  are  We c a n c h o o s e n o t t o  rights  can a l s o are  tied  to  i n the  o n l y where c e r t a i n  be  granted  often  of  defensible.  inalienable,  roles  rights.  Some,  exist.  Others  but a r e i n s t i t u t i o n a l or l e g a l  circumstances, such r i g h t s  'conditional.'  two k i n d s o f c o n t i n g e n t  roles  which can j u s t i f i a b l y  rights  changes  exercise.  be t e r m e d a s  at least  we have s e e n , e x i s t not  to  or our r o l e s .  There as  or  only  where  certain  rights minimum  economic c i r c u m s t a n c e s , make t h e g r a n t i n g  c a n be o v e r r i d e n ,  Thus  while  any  right,  "mininum-circumstance"  w h i c h a r e n o t so much o v e r r i d e n  even  rights are  as made i m p o s s i b l e  c i r c u m s t a n c e s p r o v i d e an i n s u f f i c i e n t b a s i s  if  where  t o make t h e g r a n t i n g  53  of  such  will,  rights  sensible.  i n g e n e r a l , be more i m p o r t a n t  where c i r c u m s t a n c e s A right right. and  force  us  to education  I t i s always  factors.  roles  Role  hold  those  roles.  w i t h our  created  carrying a role  out  situations,  are a l s o  right.  We  example  a good  as  supposedly upon  roles.  cannot  certain  l e v e l of e d u c a t i o n .  The  literature. rather  'prima  a  people  term  presumption  of  the  b) Whether  i s also of  in different  be  and  used  of a r i g h t ,  support  or  to  these  they the  The  cease  a u t o m a t i c a l l y assume  might  effective  i s sometimes j u s t i f i e d  (1978, p. the  rights.  once we  to f a c i l i t a t e  role  often  talking  categorizing  rights,  can  a) Whether  might  facie' i s a way  way  inalienable The  undertake  t o be  Certain  173)  thinks that  of c i t i z e n '  as 'one  without  a  Rights  This  than  different  fully  Facie  term  us  F o r example, K e r r  illustration.  p a r e n t s do,  Education  simply  Prima  either  of  for certain  they cease  can  bestowed  o f our  them.  c o n t i n g e n t upon c i r c u m s t a n c e s ,  roles,  or  to e d u c a t i o n —  contingent  rights  good  between  food  a  a r e c o n t i n g e n t because  rights  with  to choose  is a  to adequate  than a r i g h t  provide appropriate circumstances  rights  be  For example, a r i g h t  in  about  ways.  confused  about  any  rights.  kind  It  is  in  rights  of  right,  used  with contingent whenever  however, we  rights.  there  is  right reasons  o v e r r i d e the e x e r c i s e  or c i r c u m s t a n c e s  of the  right  a  are u n c e r t a i n :  t h e r e i s s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e or j u s t i f i c a t i o n  t h e r e a r e any  by  I t i s sometimes c o n t r a s t e d  situations which,  encountered  which  to  54  But  "prima  facie"  is  also  used  to  characterize  rights  which: i ) May ii)  a l w a y s have t o  Are  iii) for  'defeasible,'  Are  rights  example,  Prima rights.  facie The  not  the  the  or  latter,  to  of  education  as  we  have s e e n , a r e  rights  which  considerations.  the  depends  upon  factors  operate, certain facie  Here  i s what two  the  term  'prima  ...All  relevant,  rights,  other  one  exercising  p h i l o s o p h e r s have t o  the  in  have a p r i m a  situations  but  they are  say  about  facie  i n which they not  1980,  p.  (1968)  that  on  absolutely  conduct  in  are or any  considered...  71)  states:  a  right  i s prima  rights  rights, If  the  certain  right  whether  facie':  t h e y must a l w a y s be  say  then  will  would  one  is  rights  and  it.  case although  ...To  factors.  i s unsure  binding  Blackstone  facie  With c o n t i n g e n t  categorically  (Hook,  Prima  conditions exist,  or  human r i g h t s  validity  itself inalienable  award of  in a s s e r t i n g  about,  from  either.  justified  uncertain  distinguished  rights,  With prima  are  be  contingent  exist.  w h i c h we  can  relevant  right  priorities  'overrideable'  status  right  rights  always r e p r e s e n t are  c o n c e d e t o more p r e s s i n g  facie  is  55  to  say t h a t  that  one s e n s e ,  existence might  then,  a  two s e n s e s o f 'prima  that  evidence  be p r i m a  facie  an o b j e c t i v e Having  their  rights  existence  the  right  this  right,  feature  reasons  might,  the  'contingent'  term  right  to  in  whether  is  uncertain  support  this  turn,  any r i g h t  could  Any facie,  1972;  invalidate  grounds  that  is  right while  1977),  is  about  them.  With  for claiming  circumstances  these grounds.  a l l o w s us t o h o l d  there  circumstances  a  have.  of e x e r c i s i n g  whether  in  there  mean one i s a l w a y s c e r t a i n  unsure  education—whenever  hold  belief.  t h e r e may be v a l i d be  may  sense, the  whether  by M e l d e n ,  the  or not t h e r e  sense because prima  stated  isolated. about  right  not  b u t one m i g h t  certain  particular  or the j u s t i f i a b i l i t y  to education,  be  In t h e o t h e r  that  does  is  may  the r i g h t .  in either (firmly  person  facie'  i s uncertain  but  to f u l l y  a sense of r i g h t  like  a  situation,  sufficient  a  but  to override  thinks  particular  that  right,  be r e a s o n s  could  override i t . . .  i t means  of  person a l s o  not  properly  71)  Perhaps, In  a l w a y s be c a s h e d i n ,  o t h e r m o r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s may on  occasion (p.  i t cannot  or  Similarly, could  be  a  or c o n d i t i o n s are  fortuitous. 2.  ACTION AND RECIPIENT RIGHTS  These talk rights  rights  about  embody one o f t h e more b a s i c  rights--rights  to receive certain  Examples  of  the  former  to action, benefits, are  that  that  i s action  is  the r i g h t s  distinctions rights,  rec i p i e n t  we have t o do  in and  rights. certain  56  things  without  t a k e a walk  anyone  i n the park, or play  Examples rights  interfering.  of R e c i p i e n t  to receive  be  stands  rights.  and e c o n o m i c p o s i t i o n s . but t h e r e  They a r e  a c t u a l l y claims  things  against  assistance  required.  This  implies  duty, which  sometimes c a u s e s w e l f a r e and not as genuine  to  Most o f t h e t i m e ,  from t h i s  persons  They a r i s e  may be g r o u n d s  beings as animals.  to receive  entitlements,  and n o t f o o t b a l l .  r i g h t s are welfare  f o r man's w e l f a r e ,  them t o s u c h o t h e r one  tennis  to  c e r t a i n t y p e s o f goods and s e r v i c e s , o r r i g h t s  t o be i n c e r t a i n s o c i a l a concern  One m i g h t have t h e r i g h t  right,  to  the  a corresponding  rights  apply  because  they a r e s a i d t o  provide  rights  from  to  form  of  correlative  be  viewed  as  ( P e f f e r , 1978, p . 6 7 ) .  Discussion Some p r o b l e m s w i t h i)  As d i s c u s s e d  these c a t e g o r i e s a r e :  previously,  an i s s u e w h i c h a r i s e s from t h e  distinction  between a c t i o n and r e c i p i e n t r i g h t s has t o  the  of the c o r o l l a r i e s  of  nature rights.  are  with  corollaries  n o t r e g a r d e d by some a s a c t u a l .  perceived If  Rights  w h i c h a r i s e from t h e s e  in this  these cannot  they  way.  are considered  available  which h o l d  rights,  because  provision. genuine  because  provision.  rights are often  p r o v i s i o n of goods.  of  specific  persons,  Yet views a r e a l s o  recipient rights to  the  do  case,  they  Chapter  duty  duties  by some a s i m p r a c t i c a l .  they  In t h i s  Recipient  with  categories  which a r e not s t r i c t  These r i g h t s r e q u i r e  be made t h e s p e c i f i c  do  four  require  action  do  not  will  such  rights require  reveal  be  only  specific are  not  duties  of  regarded  as  any s p e c i f i c  arguments  genuine  which  d u t i e s of question  57  the  validity  recipient  want  in  different  Each o c c u r s our  the d u a l  been e n v i s a g e d 3.  L e g a l and  and  are.  Legal  rights  are  the  nature  of  being  both  with  the  enforcement. lacks  Moral  the  law  improve. of  of  right  (such  for  At  t h i n g s , and  consequently  are  each as v a l i d  or  active  and  as  the  what  we  to r e c e i v e .  possibility  as d u t i e s and  are by  that  rights  passive--as  rights  moral  enforced  rules  and  important  I t has  been  incarceration.  be  has  law,  and  there  i s being maintained.  Moral  as  a  method  of  that p e n i t e n t i a r y education i t i s not  the  considered  the  right  look  situation  s t a t u s of  a moral  i s no  moral  right  that a l e g a l than  be  correlates  I f , however, p r i s o n e r s c o u l d  more e f f e c t i v e  to  i t is a legal  because  i n view of  the  principles.  a t t e n t i o n to education,  same t i m e ,  the  ineffective  suggested  which might  these  by  because  which  t o how  o b l i g a t i o n s ) are  or g r o u n d s , of  prisoners  It i s in part  the  categories,  education.  i s sometimes c o n s i d e r e d  to enforce  t o be  to  source,  p e n i t e n t i a r y education  likely  both  r i g h t s are c a t e g o r i z e d a c c o r d i n g  what t h e  direction,  priority  a  MORAL RIGHTS  supported  approbation  that  f r e e d o m t o do,  also  rights  education  i t the  is  These c a t e g o r i e s are to  i t i s v i e w e d as  because there are d i f f e r e n c e s with  correlates  enforced,  activities,  there  LEGAL AND  ensuing  grounds that  to d i f f e r e n t  rights—be  important,  possess  the  i s no q u e s t i o n  containing rights  fronT  More  on  opinion, there  resulting other.  education  right.  In my although  of  to  might  prisoners  i s considered  a  and to  be  importance  or  right.  doubt about  the  58  authenticity persons sometimes laws.  who  Moral  moral  broke  or  the  The f a c t law  community  I t i s also rights  'widespread 'there  rights.  -  i n e f f e c t i v e i n stopping  acutely.  p.  of moral  because  i t  recognition  in a  persons  This  education,  i s what  that  it  can  is  when  a  i s being  i s important  t h e law i s  violating  also  be  the  felt  its quite  importance right  of  achieves  consciousness,'  legal  advocated  that  moral  community's  are prisoners  from  t o emphasize  i s established a corresponding  20).  there  i s evidence  censure  important  that  right'  that  (Young, 1976,  for prisoners'  right to  enough t o now be e n f o r c e d  and  g u a r a n t e e d by law. My q u e s t i o n in of  getting  results.  r i g h t s as being  occasions force  required  to  I see s e v e r a l  and i m p o r t a n t .  implement  the  be a b l e  right.  s y s t e m a s s u c h an  kinds  Sometimes t o o , to  i n demanding r e c o g n i t i o n ,  educational  can  exert  and I  more  generating  posit  the  occasion.  be two ways o f t a l k i n g a b o u t  these  categories.  way c a n be t e r m e d a s ' d e s c r i p t i v e ' a n d t h e s e c o n d ,  'evaluative.'delineating contrast  valid,  that  effectiveness  HUMAN AND PERSON RIGHTS  There first  equally  can others  penitentiary 4.  I have m a i n t a i n e d  a r i s e when c e r t a i n r i g h t s w i l l  than  actions  The  i s whether a l l r i g h t s have e q u a l  The  'descriptive'  r i g h t s belonging  approach  t o human  is  beings  say, to a n i m a l / i n s t i t u t i o n a l r i g h t s .  categorization  r e s t s upon t h e a t t r i b u t e s  persons.  judgements  No  are  of  a  and  good  human  This  in  of the  beings  made n o r any j u s t i f i c a t i o n  a b o u t what r i g h t s t h e s e human b e i n g s ought t o h a v e .  way o f  persons,  The b a s i s  as  and given task  59  is  left  of  t o the second  human  beings  allocation The  and  Here, t h e c o n d i t i o n s and n a t u r e  persons  a r e p r e s e n t e d as grounds f o r the  of r i g h t s .  thesis  will  "Categorization" Attributes  use  will  of the  categories w i l l used  approach.  both  approaches.  concentrate  right-holders  be d e s c r i b e d .  i n the f o l l o w i n g  section  on  who  This  section  the ' d e s c r i p t i v e ' form  the  The ' e v a l u a t i v e ' on j u s t i f i c a t i o n  basis  on  way.  of  approach  the  will  be  of r i g h t s .  A DESCRIPTIVE APPROACH TO HUMAN RIGHTS Human including people used  Rights person  simply  to  absolute.  as p e o p l e '  rights  already  right  a l l human  is  1978, p . 5 4 ) . is  that  been  rights  suggested  t o be t r e a t e d  by  sometimes  Another  more  are inalienable,  that  this  however, t h a t  with  have,  'enjoyed  A term  'universal.' such  beings  rights  w h i c h human b e i n g s have,  o f a l l human b e i n g s  respect  (Benn,  The t h e s i s does p r o p o s e ,  inalienable  right  such  I t has  which  They a r e a l l t h o s e  perspective  unrealistic. an  rights  rights.  describe  traditional  are  may  be  i_f t h e r e i s  i t would be t h e  the  dignity  and  o f human b e i n g s .  Discussion The  difficulties  which a r i s e  from  i ) The q u e s t i o n o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e Natural ii)  this  category a r e :  between t h i s  c a t e g o r y and  Rights  Potential  confounding  o f human r i g h t s  with welfare  rights i ) Human R i g h t s a n d N a t u r a l R i g h t s The  importance  of N a t u r a l R i g h t s l i e s  in i t s being  perhaps  60  a  forerunner of the concern  confuse the  t h e two.  proper  state  confusion. through other  They  the  Classic  Rights  Both  ages.  Liberals.  These  and They  or  philosophers  therefore,  were  seen  oppression  different  those  advocated  exploitation  i n power.  Natural  tradition  behind Natural r i g h t s . because  this  of h i s  by  There  will,  and  important to governing  But N a t u r a l r i g h t s  I  ways  t o L o c k e and  as p a r t i c u l a r l y  and  to  create  inalienable,  t o come from God, o r D i v i n e Law.  Rights  by t h e m s e l v e s ,  are attributed  been seen  Human  easy  b e l o n g i n g t o man a u t o m a t i c a l l y , a s p a r t  from  authorities,  origins  is  of being e s s e n t i a l t o  Natural rights,  Their  nature,  man  upon a p r e m i s e  It  seem t o have been p e r c e i v e d i n  imprescriptible. protect  rest  o f man.  as r i g h t s  inherent  f o r human r i g h t s .  have  also  i s a w e a l t h of  however,  focus  i s how e d u c a t i o n has t y p i c a l l y  on been  viewed. (ii)  Human, P e r s o n ,  and W e l f a r e  These c a t e g o r i e s a r e confusion  arises  welfare. rights. thesis be  sometimes  because  The p r o b l e m  many  i s that  Rights mistakenly  human  rights  other  kinds  presently  of  concern  i n human r i g h t s , rights  are  n o t a l l human r i g h t s  Some a l s o a c k n o w l e d g e w e l f a r e r i g h t s i s interested  equated.  The  rights  are  welfare  f o r animals.  however.  That  to  there  This might  b e l o n g i n g t o o t h e r b e i n g s does not  me.  A DESCRIPTIVE APPROACH TO PERSON RIGHTS The their all  idea  that  attributes human  human b e i n g s  can  claim  a s human b e i n g s h a s j u s t  beings possess  rights  because  been d i s c u s s e d .  - and a r e perhaps  of  While  t o be d i s t i n g u i s h e d  61  by  - these  features,  human b e i n g s do n o t  there are certain have.  This  o t h e r f e a t u r e s which  necessitates  a  category  some of  Person R i g h t s . Benn awareness' to  tells  us  (1978,  p. 6 6 ) .  envisage  what  persons  alternate  have  Telfer and  day  possibilities.'  analyses  (1965).  possession persons  such  agents.  of a r a t i o n a l  (1970,  as  I t seems a g r e e d  responsible  p . 155).  'centres of v a l u a t i o n ,  decision,  their  reason, who met  are  born  other  dissertation plan,  subject  emphasizes  make d e c i s i o n s ,  t o moral  potential  to  persons  are  rational  rationality  or  feature  (1966,  the of  persons are p. 133). In  etc.  (Dennett,  for  to that  persons.  persons are able to  Such c r i t e r i a  Exceptions are possibly  these  For i t s  There  qualities, These  could  but be  are usually  the  are also  agents  mentally  human  beings  who have n o t  classified  as  persons.  Generally, potential  Locke  and a r e r e s p o n s i b l e  judgement.  d e v e l o p e d y e t , such as c h i l d r e n . 'potential'  of  (1969) and Downie and  beliefs,  features  t h e i n s a n e , and c o m a t o s e .  with  time  1971).  by most human b e i n g s .  retarded,  i s similar to  how t h e y must be c a p a b l e o f  thoughts, d e s i r e s ,  are possibly  think,  the  view  and c h o i c e '  about  the  This  P e t e r s says that  thinking  purposes,  equipped  as the d i s t i n g u i s h i n g  i t was a l s o m e n t i o n e d  There  'conceptually  isolates  one,  Daniels,  of s e l f -  upon t h a t  Similarly,  0  kind  Dennett  Kant will  from  Chapter  1976;  certain  They a r e a l s o  seems t o have been e m p h a s i z e d  present  'a  t o be.  a l l human The  beings  distinction  are helps  persons, us  or  account  have t h e f o r the  62  difference  between  organisms, that  human  a n d human b e i n g s  i s , 'morally  1959,p. 6 1 ) . certain  concerned  We  will  f o r persons  on  who  who a r e  The d i s t i n c t i o n  rights.  justified  beings  are  beings,  and m o r a l l y a c c o u n t a b l e '  (Melden,  also  soon  responsible  agents.  human b e i n g s  because they possess  needed  see  account  and  biological  social  is  moral  mere  when  allocating  certain  rights are  their  being  considered  rights  are j u s t i f i e d f o r  how  of  A t t h e same t i m e ,  supposedly  common  needs  and  interests. Pi scussion Discussing emphasize Only  that  argument (see  It  of  actions,  treatment  to  to  are  be  For  persons  responsible  held  and  answerable This  justify  necessary  is  necessary  rational  for their  will  the r i g h t  be  to  agents.  a c t i o n s - and  the  basis  to education  While  to j u s t i f y  Human  beings  have b e c a u s e  example,  and c a n n o t  they  they  will - that  say, c l a i m the r i g h t  allocating a r e unable  they  are  claim rights  a s human b e i n g s  cannot,  of  of  an  forprisoners  five).  persons.  persons.  category  punishable.  which p e r s o n s  persons.  they  -  i s also  rights rights  can  used  chapter  to  persons  persons  consequently  this  prisoners to enjoy  lack c e r t a i n  unable  always  a l l the  features  t o account  to certain  the  of  for their  opportunities  open  be a b l e t o c l a i m e q u a l  i s - with persons  r e s p e c t and d i g n i t y might  have  of  -  access  opportunities to education. CONCLUSION TO "CATEGORIZATION OF RIGHTS" The  discussion  has  shown  that  education o f f e r s  an a r e a  63  where the  various  has  been seen how  an  action  passive the  and  education.  to o b t a i n  educational  -  but with  also these  a  right  - that  i s that  recipient  right,  what  Even  still  education,  i s , as  education  has  One too  thereby  s u c h as  subscribed  chance  need  resources  p r o v i s i o n of  - and  that  perhaps  the  further  their  this  not  a  seen  in  require  recipient  left  alone  the  to  case  a right  merely  problems o f t e n  to  as  a  believed  to  a b s e n c e of p e r s o n s t o  the  only  notion  provide  require  resources  as  certainly  t u t o r i n g i f they  aspect  In  This  of  education.  suggests,  process  of  20)  l e a r n e r are  education.  this  i s why  As  the  further  need much more - a l m o s t  learner.  of  for their  the  majority  active  voluntariness'  produce  one  The  itself.  (1966, p.  to  books.  w h i c h depends upon the Peters  self-education,  persons  education.  by  of  component  the  t o be  problems with been  other  individual  cannot proceed  in  is,  substantiate  the  both  i s not  only  helps  autodidacts  such  education is  not  rights.  often  and  Even p r i s o n e r  to  might -  the  as  learner  action  t o the  p r i s o n e r s , however, c l e a r l y  teachers  The  freedom  of  raising  education  It  received.  i f one  resources.  of  it  such r i g h t s ,  i s t o be  would  of  the  ways.  active participant  one  resources  to education.  education  accompany  Thus,  require  This perception  right.  i s i n v o l v e d as an  of  interact  for  a recipient  r e c e p t a c l e , but  rights  i n complex  i t i s p o s s i b l e to categorize  right,  process  rights  c a t e g o r i e s come t o g e t h e r  also  are  sense, I  important  a  then,  stress It ignores  participation 'the  t o have  of  wittingness  that the the and  considerations  64  I am  therefore interested  possible  arguments  that  requirements  of  provision  significant  of  in  sorting  out  the  must  not  only  there  non-interference,  but  resources.  also  concluded  t h a t the  the c o r o l l a r y Both  for  of a d u t y  very  extensive  is  restrictions on  the  minimal  of  other  education.  anything right other  a  hand,  persons, we  will  that  see,  to  make  that  the  t o be  penitentiary  as v a l i d  as  bodies.  to  the  see  left i f no  nature,  and  i f no alone one  t o attempt  nature  envisaged  because  of  dependence upon  help t o do  was  they  the  others.  need  only  i s forthcoming, what t h e y  willing  to educate  can  they  to  to provide  still  of  p r i s o n e r s as  get  or  maintain  themselves,  do the  as  because p r i s o n e r s are p r i s o n e r s - with  imposed by  right  case  unsatisfactory  might  stand, was  i s , the e d u c a t i o n  recipient  i s , even  for  education  right  I t i s thus education  situation  have o n l y a m o r a l  incarceration  a legal  chance to e x e r c i s e i t .  they  hand, we  a  of  do  non-prisoners.  restrictions  the  due  legal  where i t  i t i s a l s o p o s s i b l e t h a t they  freedom  the  that  one  confinement  Thus, even  the  such  rights,  specific  play  about p r i s o n e r s ' e d u c a t i o n ,  to  As  into  On  of  action right  p r o v i s i o n by  support,  their  support,  have an an  more  of  of  duties  of n o n - i n t e r f e r e n c e was  come  for prisoners.  them  But  of  corollaries  education needing  corollary  of  be  legal  In s u p p o r t  I have a l s o i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e c o r o l l a r i e s  merits  - i t becomes  i f p r i s o n e r s are  too  is  examined.  dependent  obligation,  t o have  as  of p e n i t e n t i a r y e d u c a t i o n is  necessary  specifically being  if  a legal  toward  the  right The  suggests  upon p e r s o n s  any,  all  that  feeling  providing  65  education.  At present,  there  must answer  for failure  t o implement  right  i s no b i n d i n g  law t o w h i c h  persons  what c a n be c o n s i d e r e d  as a  of p r i s o n e r s . The  dissertation  education,  for  specifically  persons,  both  for  opportunity.  III.  prisoners  the  Thus,  including  opportunity  a l s o e x a m i n e s an argument  former,  if  and on  prisoners,  non-prisoners,  grounds  education  f o r the r i g h t t o  of  equality  i s a Person  have  this  although  right,  of  then a l l  right—of  equal  to education. J U S T I F I C A T I O N OF RIGHTS  The  present  discussion  will:  1.  Discuss  how r i g h t s  have u s u a l l y been  2.  Discuss  t h e p r o b l e m s t h a t accompany  This  justified such  attempts  i s necessary t o :  1.  Introduce  to  education.  2.  Forecast  potential  ways o f j u s t i f y i n g  the issues that w i l l  when a t t e m p t i n g  to j u s t i f y  be  the right  the r i g h t  encountered to education i n  part i c u l a r . I the  am  right  chiefly  interested  to education. summary,  These  Rights.  In  belonging  t o human b e i n g s .  are rights  Person  Human R i g h t s ,  and  rights  are  responsible.  are  Person  rational,  of persons  isolated  c o n s i d e r a t i o n s when c l a i m i n g / a l l o c a t i n g c e r t a i n persons  distinctive  further  relevant  that  concern  c a n be d e s c r i b e d a s r i g h t s  of  i s said  features  c a t e g o r i e s which  because  It  certain  human  i n those  which a r e rights.  self-determining,  and  66  AN  'EVALUATIVE' APPROACH TO HUMAN AND PERSON RIGHTS  This  section  understanding strategies  uses  human  which  and  have  the person  been  reference w i l l  be made t o  issues  raised  which  ought  justify  a right  to education.  ARGUMENTS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS  1.  Argument  beings can f l o u r i s h '  of  rationale being,' basic  or 'indeed are  the  to live  states  life  i s 'that  needs  claims  be  liberty  needs  that  a  on  minimal  opportunity  Peffer  of  the  questions  or  when a t t e m p t i n g t o  t h e grounds  living'  care  of  for rights  which  of  which  human  suggests the urgency a n d t o have  p. 80).  Raphael's  the i n i t i a t i v e  o f a human  (1969,  at a l l , ' unless  certain  p. 115).  Wasserstrom  t o ' d e v e l o p one's  capabilities  of  (1971, p . 1 7 9 ) . a  of s o c i e t y ,  means, s t a t u s ,  the deprived  Barnhardt  community a r e e x p e c t e d t o  r u l e s and a s p i r a t i o n s limit  under  (1978,  a s a human b e i n g ' members  that  According to  ' i f we a r e t o s u r v i v e  r e m a i n a human b e i n g  because  'below  reviewing  and i n t e r e s t s .  one c a n n o t e x e r c i s e  necessity a life  rights  worth  taken  conform t o c e r t a i n to  justified  (1978, p . 4 5 ) .  need-related  sort  to  these c a t e g o r i e s ,  kinds  t h e y a r e ' t h o s e minimum c o n d i t i o n s  such  approach  from Needs and I n t e r e s t s  f u l f i l man's most b a s i c  Kleinig,  and  the  A.  they  In  t o be c o n s i d e r e d  Human R i g h t s a r e sometimes  any  rights.  used t o j u s t i f y  special  of  'evaluative'  will  there  has  o p p o r t u n i t i e s , and be  t o p r e v e n t t h e m s e l v e s from f a l l i n g '  given (1969, p .  every 338).  Discussion One  of  the d i f f i c u l t i e s  o f s u c h an argument  i s that  there  67  is  no ' f i x e d  are  not  (Raphael,  nature,' must  p. 4 9 ) .  such  1967,  a  pursue  'broad  rights  (1973, p . 3 ) .  These  comments  determining criteria  for basic some  adequate  'would s u f f e r still  determine  of  do n o t s h a r e a  'fixed  ends'  of t h i s  nature  possibilities,'  indeterminate  suggest  a  needs, state  such of  nature  lack  what needs a r e b a s i c .  furthering  'Men  in fulfilment  range  t o u s e s u c h an  can  p. 6 5 ) .  what fixed  that  they  (MacDonald,  A c c o r d i n g t o C r i t t e n d e n , human b e i n g s a r e c a p a b l e  unsafe  without  f o r what a r e r e g a r d e d a s needs and  and t h u s one c a n n o t  necessarily  1970, of  principle'  of  Certain  as  that  affairs,'  satisfaction  some f u n d a m e n t a l  as  i t would be  the  concrete  basis  of  ground f o r  p h i l o s o p h e r s do o f f e r they  or  be  of these needs,' harm'  that  'be  related  so ' c r u c i a l the  human  to that  being  ( S u t t o n , 1978, p. 103). I t  be c h a l l e n g e d , however:  ...How c a n p o s s e s s i o n o f a common human  nature,  a common humanness, g i v e n t h e v a g u e n e s s o f t h e content of  .  .  treatment,  (McCloskey, White giving  be a g r o u n d  does  rise  for .  .  1978, p. 30) not  see  a  logical  and t h e need  c o n n e c t i o n between a need  forming the b a s i s  (1984, p . 1 2 5 ) .  He a l s o d o e s n o t t h i n k t h a t  t h e need  but r a t h e r  the worth, these  on what  v a l u e , and b e n e f i t s  needs  equality  of r e s p e c t , and the l i k e ? . . .  to a claim,  itself,  .  fulfilled.  rights  a r e b a s e d on  i t represents, that  i t b r i n g s t o man--when  The r i g h t s  of r i g h t s  i s , on  he h a s had  would n o t (on t h i s  account)  68  stem  from  n e e d s , b u t from  necessary  logical  t h e good t h e y  c o n n e c t i o n between  good, a n d h i s c l a i m i n g a r i g h t While or  rights  protecting  way.  our  needs  generosity.  human b e i n g s ,  or t h a t  but  has l i t t l e  Another basic  fulfilment.  Lucas  humanitarian i s that  necessary  these  ways  'plausible  matter  f o r man's  enforcing,  of  equal  one,  humanity,  treatment of each  of e q u a l i t y ,  gap  between  one h a s r i g h t s  is  unsure  to their  how t h e ways i n  'advances an argument  start  other,  (1971, p . 141).  (1971, p . 1 1 6 ) .  to  no  a r e not the only  t h e r e seems t o be a  for  o f human r i g h t s '  in  of  to p r i n c i p l e s  reasons  w h i c h men a r e s u p p o s e d t o be a l i k e  clarity  they  thinks that  needs and t h e i d e a t h a t  Wasserstrom  achievement  ways  we do n o t , i n g e n e r a l , t o r t u r e  criticism  'survival'  and i n t e r e s t s ,  t o do w i t h a d h e r e n c e  stems more from  being  is  toi t .  o f needs c a n be a l s o a  benevolence,  and t h e r e  something  a r e among t h e more p o t e n t  Satisfaction  etc.,  bring,  with,  Seeing  a  f o r the lack  of  he f i n d s m i s s i n g t h e  intermediate premises'  which  connect  the  two. This is  is  a very popular  sometimes seen  This  a s an i n s t a n c e o f t h e  i s n o t , of c o u r s e ,  rights, certain  argument a g a i n s t human r i g h t s .  unique  b u t i s commonly u s e d 'assumed'  argument a g a i n s t human r i g h t s , b e c a u s e human b e i n g s p o s s e s s sufficient things.  reason  to  claim  t o arguments found  in  connections  Naturalistic  philosophy  are actually i t i s used  certain they  to  ought  To do so would be t o go i l l i c i t l y  Fallacy.  a g a i n s t human indicate  unfounded.  to from  we do n o t be g i v e n the  that  In t h i s  t o p o i n t out that  attributes,  It  just have  certain  descriptive  69  to  the evaluative,  difficulties using  from  which a r i s e  some ' a n t e c e d e n t  ' i s ' t o 'ought.* from a t t e m p t s  These a r e the s o r t s of  to justify  human  f e a t u r e o f human e x i s t e n c e '  rights  (Hook, 1980,  p. 8 2 ) . 2.  Argument  Vlastos in  from t h e E q u a l  b e l i e v e s there  which they  do n o t  and  inherent  to the nature  the  'freedom'  different  e a c h one's other's'  p.  313).  equality  and  the  leads  c o n d i t i o n s of m e r i t , foundation  (Blackstone,  their  f o r they  value  of  is each  they  'as  to a belief  involve  Consequently,  valuable  is  happen  to well-being  'well-  do n o t  i n d i v i d u a l s enjoy. freedom  beings  T h e s e two a s p e c t s a r e  the to  as  any  same,  'quite  choose'  (1973,  ' i n the prima  facie  and f r e e d o m . '  ' a b s t r a c t s ' human b e i n g s  from t h e e x t e r n a l  c o n t r i b u t i o n t o s o c i e t y , e t c . I t forms t h e  of v a r i o u s  i s entitled  t o human  another,  p. 312).  Vlastos  o f man's r i g h t  Such an argument  everyone  which  o f 'the t h i n g s  This  one  o f human b e i n g s ,  well-being  independently'  from  (1973,  things  because  a r e two main a s p e c t s  differ  being,'  Worth and D i g n i t y o f Man  human 'simply  rights,  and w e l f a r e  qua t h e  fact  that  rights, he  t o which  is  human'  1968, p . 6 2 0 ) .  Discussion The  premise  that  needs and i n t e r e s t s ,  or i n t h e i r  often  underlies claims  beings  i s normative:  ...To  say t h a t  human b e i n g s  are 'equal'  inherent  f o r human r i g h t s .  a given  person  value  in sharing a s human  S u c h a view  i s human n o t  of  basic  beings, human  70  only  classifies  descriptive general  criteria  (1971)  argument. argument equal  a certain  the p o s t u l a t i o h  Benn  offers  from  interests  of  t h e y have s u c h an  Benn  does  Equality  that  interests  of  of a  not  consideration  t o everyone's  sees  t o 'have e v e r y o n e ' s  those  of  everyone  (1971, p . 1 5 7 ) . imbeciles  in  consideration as  We w i l l  the  Benn's p r i n c i p l e  same  to their  interests  likely  way that  do  as  not  example,  be  promotion  give  considered  t o be a f f e c t e d  equal  Thus Benn alongside  by t h e d e c i s i o n ' able  to  treat  we do o t h e r human b e i n g s , b u t  we  interests  moralities  (1971, p. 1 5 8 ) .  interests  not, f o r  ensures  will to live  still  give  a decent  the  life,  same  a s much  we w o u l d o u r own. Benn's argument  rights. treated as  else  to individual  elitist  they  than  particular  groups, but i n t h e i r  group  this  rather  this  attention  example,  of c e r t a i n  particular  that  on  p r e s e n t e d a s an  interests,  think  enough  For  variation  i t i s better of  i n order to  rights.  interesting  gives  persons.  the need  o f human b e i n g s  consideration  acknowledge interests  f o r him..  picture  to think  equal  treatment.  Argument  that  He p r e f e r s from  prescribes  1968, p . 625)  has t o a c c e p t  accept  to certain  but a l s o  modes of t r e a t m e n t  (Blackstone,  One  him a c c o r d i n g  will  Prisoners  i s useful have  to support  committed  d i f f e r e n t l y i n some r e s p e c t s be  argued  later,  for  prisoners'  c r i m e s and w i l l  have t o be  from  claims  non-prisoners.  there are l i m i t s to t h i s  But,  different  71  treatment.  Benn's  treatment, that  principle  ensures  t h e common i n t e r e s t  prisoners s t i l l  share  in living  with other  attention  and c o n s i d e r a t i o n .  they w i l l  be t r e a t e d  interests  despite this as a decent  different  human  non-prisoners w i l l  In o t h e r words, d e s p i t e  differently  a s human b e i n g s  that  must  i n some u n a v o i d a b l e still  being  receive  the ways,  fact their  be c o n s i d e r e d e q u a l l y w i t h  others. OVERVIEW OF THE ARGUMENTS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS Both  the arguments, t h a t  " E q u a l Worth a n d D i g n i t y , " common these  needs  and  specified while  i n the second  beings.  is  equally  with  common  needs  of  man's  In t h e Argument  and  these  interests  requirements  and i n e x t r i c a b l e argument words,  of  as the reason  man,  a r e seen  p a r t of the nature of  i s also actually  the  from  are usually  n e e d s and i n t e r e s t s  common why t h e y  regard t o the p r o t e c t i o n  think  that  provision  quality  of l i f e  human  and  the  what  the grounds  nature  of  human  s h o u l d be t r e a t e d  enhancement  i s being argued  o f goods and s e r v i c e s  of  this  f o r i s n o t so much t h e  as  much  as  c o n s i d e r e d a p p r o p r i a t e t o our d i g n i t y  beings.  same b a s i c to  premise  nature.  I direct  In o t h e r  and I n t e r e s t s , " and  the  which d i f f e r s .  argument,  postulated  from  and fundamental  The f i r s t  the second.  beings  as  basic  "Needs  I t i s o n l y the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of  these  b e i n g a more i n t r i n s i c  human of  Interests,  as b e i n g  operate  interests.  needs a n d c a p a c i t i e s  Needs  as  and  i s from  A l l human b e i n g s  have a t l e a s t  n e e d s and i n t e r e s t s and would e n j o y  standards  represented  by  this  a life  quality  a  certain  and s t a t u s some o f t h e according  of l i f e .  This  72  quality  of  dignity that  life  and  considered  respect  i t i s the  treatment  is  as  r i g h t of  which  can  essential  human b e i n g s . a l l human  enable  to  maintaining  It i s , therefore,  beings  to  be  them t o m a i n t a i n  our argued  accorded  this  the  standard  of  life. How that  t h e s e arguments a r e  human r i g h t s a r e  to the have  d a n g e r s of certain  suggest  that  the  the  the  same s o r t s of  two  of  is,  arguments.  for  (p.  As  Miller  need  initially  to c l a i m  reason.  further  than  rather,  that  to  but  to accord  ought  to  i s unwarranted.  I  humanness  everyone's  requiring  to  that  we  us  postulate  'equal.'  state  Stating  human, e x p o s e s  that  This  a connection  I t seems odd  assert  are  This  be  would  be  the  discrimination. made between  a l l human b e i n g s  r i g h t s to  only  the have  some.  As  that  t o be  something  that  principle  of  i s a human r i g h t  in this  treated  respect a l l  equally...  39)  sees  i s the The  are  them s i m i l a r r i g h t s w i t h o u t  therefore,  to p r e s c r i b e  men  important.  (1976) s t a t e s :  ...To is  this  r i g h t s makes them  t h e s e common n e e d s , e t c . , Crittenden  is also  b e c a u s e we  nature  r i g h t s , but  for according  There  this  a r g u m e n t s go  as  reason  basis  accorded  using  rights  stated  i t , 'The  p r i n c i p l e of  logical  extension  equality'  arguments  above  in chapter  one  and  are  of  (1976, p.  useful  elsewhere  to  the 143).  support  that  all  the  claim  human  made  beings  73  have  the  right  human b e i n g s . - or t o use chapters  to  be t r e a t e d  with  Such a r i g h t , a s h a s j u s t emerged, a  will  term  mentioned  before  also  show how t h e p h i l o s o p h y  two  a r g u m e n t s becomes t h e f o u n d a t i o n  the  r i g h t to education  1.  Argument  men'  that  there  have  a  (Mayo,  a r e sometimes d e f i n e d 1967, p . 7 7 ) .  t o . ' The  making such c l a i m s raised  before  have  void.  This  expressed argument  duties  a s 'a c l a i m  gives  rise  person w i t h a duty phrase  Later i n these  to  claim  This  on b e h a l f o f  to the c r i t i c i s m  to give  ' a l l men'  i s held  argument  reflects  of the q u e s t i o n a b l e  specific  inalienable.  from No S p e c i f i c P e r s o n / D u t y  i s 'no s p e c i f i c  right  i s unqualified  for prisoners.  ARGUMENTS AGAINST HUMAN RIGHTS  all  -  f o r an  B.  Human R i g h t s  not  t h e d i g n i t y and r e s p e c t of  authority  me what  I  t o be vague, the  issue  o f r i g h t s w h i c h do  as c o r r e l a t e s .  Discussion Two p o i n t s 1. be  may be o f f e r e d t o c o u n t e r  Human R i g h t s  recipient  provision.  rights  point  include  requiring  claims the  correlate  beyond n o n - i n t e r f e r e n c e . although  interference,  a r i g h t remains a r i g h t .  broad  o f human r i g h t s c o n t a i n  human b e i n g s c a n c l a i m , kind  discharge  of r i g h t .  of  which  would  duties  only  of  rights to action,  r i g h t t o f r e e d o m w h i c h does n o t r e q u i r e  may a l s o be r e c a l l e d , t h a t  category  argument:  to welfare,  But human r i g h t s c a n a l s o c o n t a i n  such as the popular specific  may  this  Flathman's requiring  It i s possible a l l the kinds  a n d human b e i n g s c a n c l a i m  of  any  (1976) non-  that the rights  more t h a n one  74  2.  a)  Mayo  person/persons  suggests  has  identifiable'  (1967,  p l a c e s and p e r s o n s (1978, Morin  duty,'  but  p. 7 3 ) .  i s not that  these  Some  p l a c e s a duty  (1981) a r g u e s  are  attempts  on a l l  human  incumbent belongs  suggests  to respect  positions  that  those 'Cs'  in  respect  p. 91).  rights' and  of a u t h o r i t y ,  ensure  of  'not  readily  to cite  definite  beings.  Sutton  responsibility.'  fraternal  such  a  obligation,  although  h a v i n g no s p e c i f i c the  so b e c a u s e  parties,  they  they think  responsible If there  themselves  into  International  or  those  duty  The  Cs  t o which  are  of t h e i r  do  he  labels  those  in  responsibility  f o r example,  the p o l i c e  not  hold  members  of  respect  certain  respect  ' i ti s  Flathman  society  as  such who,  rights,  of the r i g h t .  t h e y have an o b l i g a t i o n  enough  some  to  to ensure  citizens,  are  of r i g h t s  or usually  are  obligation  'Ds.'  rights,  The Ds g e n e r a l l y  situation,  p. 8 9 ) .  i t i s part  for certain  authority;  undertake  (1976,  the  where  special  rights.  basis  upon a l l members o f t h e p r a c t i c e  s u c h members t h e  (1976,  i t on t h e  'no s p e c i f i c  love, e t c .  Flathman  do  i t  p . 105) i n t r o d u c e s t h e n o t i o n o f 'group  brotherly  to  a  that  They  interested  and members o f t h e p r a c t i c e o f interested  Ds,  they  may  form  f o r m a l o r o r g a n i z e d body s u c h a s Amnesty  the  British  Columbia  Civil  Liberties  Assoc i a t i o n . Thus, against of  this  everyone,  counterargument  accommodates r i g h t s  and a c c e p t s them a s r i g h t s  s p e c i f i a b l e persons b) Mayo p r o m o t e s  t o bear the  idea  even  as c l a i m s  i n the absence  duties. that  'agents  of  government'  75  (1967, p . 79) have t o p e r f o r m d u t i e s It  i s thus the State's  ...securing greatest  number o f p e r s o n s ,  external  conditions  the  greatest  possible  the  c a p a c i t i e s of p e r s o n a l i t y . . .  This that  to the  the  (Barker,  necessary f o r  development of  p. 136)  argument  r i g h t s ought  interference,  reflects  t h e d e b a t e between t h o s e who c o n t e n d  t o engender  and  those  strict  who  duties  hold  have o t h e r  rights  d e p e n d s on w h i c h v i e w of r i g h t s one Argument  The  corollaries.  Support  arguments  for  human  beings  have  is  t o be c l a i m a b l e  r i g h t s of a l l  so  valid  people  1967, p. 4 9 ) .  that  rejection  of  that human  supports.  of  f o r everyone.  at  a l l times  rights  their  being  in  human  a l l situations'  untenable.  human r i g h t s c a n n o t a s p i r e  being  They have t o be t h e  In t h e minds o f some, t h i s  o n e r o u s a s t o make such, c l a i m s  therefore,  or  r i g h t s s t r e s s that  f o r human b e i n g s on t h e g r o u n d s  (Cranston,  i t i s sufficient  from U n i v e r s a l i t y  claimed  'the  o f p r o v i s i o n o r non-  that  rights  2.  of a l l c i t i z e n s .  duty o f :  and g u a r a n t e e i n g ,  possible  on b e h a l f  requirement  I t i s argued,  to the s t a t e of being  rights. Discussion I think  are  human r i g h t s a r e u n i v e r s a l - - t o  recommended g o a l s  common  standard  of  that  e v e r y o n e ought  achievement  for  the extent  to t r y to  that  attain,  they 'a  a l l p e o p l e s and n a t i o n s '  76  (Benn and P e t e r s , beings  on  would  like  That  they  dubious  1959, p . 1 0 1 ) .  t h e grounds t h a t t o see these cannot  rights  for  human  t h e y a r e human b e i n g s means t h a t  rights  always  Advocating  attained  by  be so a t t a i n e d  a l l human  we  beings.  does n o t mean t h e y a r e  rights.  Summary This us  review  anticipate  education, argument C.  the  strategies  especially  c a n be j u s t i f i e d  for  justifying  for prisoners.  i s t h e "Argument  from  has h e l p e d  the  A particularly  right  to  worthwhile  E q u a l Worth and D i g n i t y . "  ARGUMENTS FOR PERSON RIGHTS  Person certain common  o f how human r i g h t s  Rights are allocated  features  they  identifying  justify  have t h e s e ,  rights rational  persons  on  These  can  be  animals.  used  from  There  allocated agents  d e r i v e from to  such  competent  features.  adult  who a r e a b l e t o t a k e  provide claims  a ground (natural  appropriate for  for a special  human  seems t o  s e t of moral  o r human r i g h t s ) w h i c h a r e  animals...  to  some  features,  They a r e s p e c i f i c  o n l y f o r s u c h c r e a t u r e s and n o t  any o t h e r  certain  sometimes  beings, that i s ,  responsibility  f e a t u r e of persons  of  possess.  actions:  ...The s p e c i a l  basis  o t h e r s who do n o t  are  some, b u t n o t a l l , human b e i n g s  rights  the  Human b e i n g s p o s s e s s  and a c t i o n s d i f f e r e n t  f o r example,  however, w h i c h Person  possess.  traits.  treatment  to  for  their  77  (Murphy,  Kerr  1978, p. 231)  holds  that  ' c o n c e p t i o n s o f what as  'minimal  'not  just  loaded  liberties  sense  organisms,  that  or e n t i t l e m e n t s . '  (Kleinig,  sense,'  culturally  (1978, but  'person' r i g h t s  a r e grounded i n  i t i s t o be a p e r s o n . ' She c o n s i d e r s  i n a raw, p h y s i c a l  constitute'  agents  certain  p. 1 6 9 ) .  are  also  We  They e n a b l e us t o l i v e  but a l s o  and  in a  socially  are  not  'purposing,  these  'normatively  based  definitions  merely  biological  self-reflective'  moral  1978, p . 3 0 ) .  Discussion T h i s argument c a n be c r i t i c i z e d "Argument Rights.  From  Needs  In s h o r t ,  made, an e m p i r i c a l Melden  the  rights  premise  provides  a  still  a r e seen  as a p a r t  is logically  or anyone e l s e  different  used  to  remain  the  Fallacy  of one's s t a t u s as a p e r s o n . . .  is  one  is  conclusion.  justification.  one  There  leap  of  would  moral p o s s e s s i o n without  s e e s human b e i n g s a s m o r a l  Human  basis  of t h i s  Melden  the  justification.  i s removed  because  Consequently:  i m p o s s i b l e f o r anyone,  p . 167)  as  justify  "naturalistic"  of t h e s e f e a t u r e s .  (1977,  way  of  t o do a n y t h i n g t h a t  community.  same  route  one  a moral  the  leads to a normative  s p e c t r e of the N a t u r a l i s t i c  ...it  in  Interests"  t h e same u n q u a l i f i e d  F e a t u r e s of p e r s o n s But  and  in  oneself, deprive  depriving  a g e n t s and p e r s o n s basic  right  which  living these  78  moral  agents  (Melden,  have,  The  I  persons.  have  He  tied  to  interests'  their  argument  that  is  unique  of s o c i e t a l  beings  structures.  s t a t u s a s human  Only  I am  different  basic  right other  is  human  E x a m p l e s would be  Put b r i e f l y ,  fundamental,  have - t h a t  - and o t h e r  that  as  because these  etc.  i s one b a s i c ,  persons/human  this  institutions.  education,  p u r s u e one's own i n t e r e s t  our  this  state  of s o c i a l  to medical aid,  which  result  is  from o t h e r human r i g h t s ,  v i e w a p p e a r s t o be t h e r e right  with  does  are the r e s u l t  right  right  own  w h e t h e r M e l d e n c a t e g o r i z e s human b e i n g s  distinguished  the  t o 'pursue t h e i r  agents.  problem  uncertain  rights  right  1977, p . 1 6 7 ) . T h i s  n a t u r e as moral  from  the  inalienable  i s the r i g h t to  human r i g h t s t h e former  Melden's  which a r e t h e  i s bound up w i t h  beings.  CONCLUSION TO "JUSTIFICATION OF RIGHTS" With  regard  first  to  c a t e g o r i z e d and j u s t i f i e d because they is that  require  education  rights  i s more  are usually  as r i g h t s  these  commonly c a t e g o r i z e d  human  rights  in this  basic  rights  from  accomplished  a only  taken care o f . right. I  basic  Education  It i s possibly have  chosen  way.  best  been  Education  I t i s suggested, a  claimed While  the basic cannot,  have  t o be human b e i n g s .  education,  after  they  w h i c h human b e i n g s c a n c l a i m  appropriately  g r o u n d s o f needs and i n t e r e s t s . benefit  rights,  person  however,  right.  Human  f o r human b e i n g s on t h e  everyone might  this  education  physical  can  be  a m e n i t i e s have been  therefore,  be a " b a s i c "  viewed as a c o n t i n g e n t  t o view human r i g h t s  be a b l e t o  broadly  human  right. a s a l l o r any  79  rights  proper  subsumed them a  under  i n a more  human  treated a  with  category.  might  indignities  n e v e r be  treatment  of  to  ignored,  and  human  beings.  the  have t h e r i g h t  because  and  be  will  prescribes  always  be  I t i s thus  of  thesis,  to  it  this  the  such  limits This  relevant  to  right  i n the  ' i n a l i e n a b l e . ' Such a  right  fairly  t o be  to regard  in  particular,  because o f the premise  treated  right  i s the r i g h t  I t i s possible  be  t o view  the only  we c a n s u f f e r a s human b e i n g s .  view o f human r i g h t s , central  that  c l a i m a s a human b e i n g ,  essential  r i g h t s would  B u t I have a l s o c h o s e n  d i g n i t y and r e s p e c t .  as  possible  this  Person  'narrow' way, when I s u g g e s t  being  right  can  f o r human b e i n g s t o h a v e .  and  that  with  is  prisoners  dignity  and  respect. It category only  is  also  of person  persons  recognize  (Dennett,  as  prisoners  a l l human that  agents beings  can  comatose. for their  exercise  range  of  responsible  person  discretion.  This  demonstrate  their  are  accounted can  as  Persons  While  persons,'  being as  persons.  from  totally  rational  responsibilities.  freedom who  that  would  does n o t mean  ought ideally that  responsibility.  p e r s o n h o o d , a s much a s b e i n g  'we  we  also  personhood' insane,  or  individuals  a c t i o n s c a n a n d must have r i g h t s by  their  A  f o r , which  claim.  exempt human b e i n g s  1976, p . 1 7 5 ) , f o r i n s t a n c e ,  responsible  their  that  responsible  conditions  irreversibly  certain  premise  r i g h t s has a l s o t o be  almost  'recognize  they  a  which  They a l s o r e q u i r e a  to use  persons Rather,  responsible  be  permitted  this need  freedom  a with  rights  to  r i g h t s a r e p a r t of i s .  It  is  as  80  though  they  responsibly as  a  require  rights  as r e s p o n s i b l e  'paradigm'  'self-directed,  in  order  agents.  This  right-holder  t o be t o be a b l e i s why  individuals  a s s e r t i v e conduct'  Flathman  toact cites  who a r e c a p a b l e o f  (1976, p . 7 2 ) .  CONCLUSION TO THE CHAPTER In know the  this  about  chapter  r i g h t s to carry  d i s s e r t a t i o n has  education  can  Thus we n e e d e d do.  I have d i s c u s s e d  improve  justifying  such this  the t h e s i s the  a  right.  we  as  well  need  to  One c o n c e r n o f  whether  the q u a l i t y of p e n i t e n t i a r y  t o n o t e some o f right,  things  forward.  question  t o i n v e s t i g a t e what  We a l s o needed  claiming  been  some  a  right  to  education.  r i g h t s a r e , and what t h e y c a n the as  problems  involved  in  some o f t h e g r o u n d s f o r  81  IV.  Chapter could  t h r e e e x p l o r e d the n a t u r e of  justify  good g r o u n d s right  to  right  right.  various  education, right  the It  rights  kinds of r i g h t s .  c a n be f o u n d  a legal  examines  THE RIGHT TO EDUCATION  a  for claiming large  part  and  begins  usually  with  an  that  prisoners  of the case  advanced  explication  one  I t i s assumed t h a t i f have  f o r making  would have been e s t a b l i s h e d .  arguments  how  This  the  this  chapter  to establish of  a  such a  concept  of  educat i o n . THE  CONCEPT OF EDUCATION  The  concept  prisoners. content  of  education d i s c u s s e d here  However, what  or  programs,  i s envisaged  while  for prisoners.  Hirst  P e t e r s ( 1 9 7 0 ) , what  and  of e d u c a t i o n i s t h a t to  distinguish  by way  of  on s u c h a c o n c e p t , must be  As a n a l y z e d by  i t embodies  processes,  for prisoners,  based  appropriate  i s not unique t o  Peters  is distinctive the c r i t e r i a  activities,  about which  aims,  (1966),  and  the concept c a n be  used  e n d - p r o d u c t s as  educational. Peters states identify  of  argues mind'  a person  that (1966,  as  certain  'specific  p . 5) f o r m  the b a s i s  c a s e s of e d u c a t i o n a r e  cases  the i n d i v i d u a l  educated up  by which  'educated':  ...The c e n t r a l i n which  achievements  who  i s being  i s b e i n g l e d o r i n d u c e d t o come  t o some s t a n d a r d ; t o a c h i e v e  (166, p . 16)  something...  and  one c a n  82  The  criteria  (1) is  recommended  ...that  'education'  worthwhile  (2) t h a t  to those  and  w h i c h a r e not (1966, p.  understanding. as  8).  T h i s means t h a t ,  of  Educated  characterizes persons to  2. worthwhile  the  a  The  important,  by  are a l s o  hold a what  'way  of  i n depth  facts, which  why"  to  breadth  also  possess  can  have  of  1966,  p e r s p e c t i v e ' (p. The  12).  knowledge  outlook  on  l o o k i n g a t t h i n g s ' (p. 8 ) . and  the  'some  things' (Peters,  know. their  like:  p o s s e s s i n g a body of they  'cognitive  they  and  they  of  are  being able to give reasons  they  life.  It  Educated evidence  know.  knowledge  is  made  up  of  things  considered  desirable.  criteria how  of  by  difference  their  and  and  persons  a s i d e from  "reason  persons  what t h e y  These  it,  scheme'  a l s o c a r e about  support  knowledge  what e d u c a t e d  knowledge, b o t h  'conceptual  makes  to i t ;  some k i n d of c o g n i t i v e p e r s p e c t i v e  indicate  They a r e t r a n s f o r m e d possess  involve  a mere c o l l e c t i o n  understanding p.  become c o m m i t t e d  20)  They p o s s e s s  necessary  who  t r a n s m i s s i o n of what  inert;...  These c r i t e r i a  knowledge  i m p l i e s the  ' e d u c a t i o n ' must  understanding  1.  are:  one  emphasize  possesses  important.  ...Education  that,  i t , and  while  what one  knowledge  is  i s a b l e t o do  with  C r i t t e n d e n (1973) s u p p o r t s  is directly  concerned  not  simply  such a  view:  83  with d i s c r e t e with  bodies  t h e way t h e y  of  the l e a r n e r ,  on  the outlook  constitute (p.  f i t together  and w i t h  (1973,  that  Both criteria  such  Peters  i n the experience  person  as  are  education,  of t h i s  .  that  to  are less  that  Peters  (1970,  Scheffler  but  central  to  the  some  a r e based.  (1973)  moral  understanding  'human  also  also  o f t h e mode o r modes u s e d  a full  p . 57)  not only c e r t a i n  upon w h i c h t h e s e  and  e d u c a t i o n aims t o  integrity,  These a r e e s s e n t i a l l y  important they  and  possesses  autonomy,  (1966)  people.  maintains  while H i r s t  f o r the assessment  educate  discuss  in efforts  criteria.  While  of the concept of  thesis  and  will  not  be d i s c u s s e d .  Peters' prisoners. prisoners 1.  (1966)  approach  The i m p l i c a t i o n s  to  Education  outlook  on  for  life  can  It  can  and d e s i r a b l e  p r o v i d e p r i s o n e r s w i t h what t h e y might  i n t h e way o f knowledge e s s e n t i a l  thought,  useful  p e r s p e c t i v e as a  The n o t i o n o f e d u c a t i o n a s w o r t h w h i l e  society.  i s relevant for  which a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y  The n o t i o n o f an e d u c a t e d  2.  t h i s concept  lie in:  transformed  missed  but  lifestyle...  'knowledge and u n d e r s t a n d i n g '  further  .  the influence  p . 60)  an e d u c a t e d  excellences'  they  .  12)  'humanize and c i v i l i z e , '  to  .  and t h e manner o f a c t i n g  a person's  Scheffler  assert  o f knowledge  also  and i n d e p e n d e n t  to s u r v i v a l  in  p r o v i d e the chance t o d e v e l o p judgement:  have  modern  critical  84  ...Education habits and,  serves  both  t o p a s s on  of mind t h a t make up  at  the  same t i m e ,  to  (Scheffler,  1973,  This account education also the  way  one  i n our  to  meet  identified. developed  'We  along  There  are  order  would n o t  to prepare  cases,  it  i s the  is a criterial  are  those  that t r a i n i n g  goals.  As  mentioned  conveyance of  training  and  skills  be  in  p.  for a trade  in  chapter  accompanied  one,  capacities  vocational  as e d u c a t i o n — i f t h e y  I will  authors who  are  engage  skills  have not  particularly a  right  this  to  in education In  "training." case  occupation. broader  the  in  many But i t  criteria  It i s also educational  i t i s p o s s i b l e that  efforts of  mean  had  or o c c u p a t i o n .  i n an  by  figures  5).  Two  this  They  dispositions  i s meant by  i n w h i c h we  well  and  'educated'  1966,  a b o u t what  is.  of  r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of  these  programs e n c a p s u l a t e  intellectual  programs  considered  a person  s e n s e of e d u c a t i o n — i n  possible  mental  criteria  of e d u c a t i o n .  r e q u i r e d to perform  concept  "education,"  i s more a p p r o p r i a t e t o c a l l  too  the  of e d u c a t i o n  abilities  (Peters,  sense  ourselves  concept  the of  senses  coherent  T h u s , by  call  lines'  other  One  the  attain sort  of  i d e a s o f what e d u c a t i o n  language.  such  others  a n a l y s i s and  to produce c o n f u s i o n  education.  and  s e n s e of  the  culture...  60)  their  refined  to h e l p people  needed  likely  simply  culture  .  in that  Peters  important  importantly efforts  by  i s not  amount t o a  p.  civilized  form  autonomous p a r t i c i p a n t [ s ]  the v a r i e d  the  to  broaden  the  learners.  In t h i s  way,  or  literacy  incorporate educational  can  be  goals.  85  The  o t h e r sense  "education" When we we  ask,  may  roughly  i s not  written  occupational Indeed  'Have t h e y  'Have  always  easy  about  rights  can  be  of e d u c a t i o n .  completed  their  term  system.  education?',  a l l the grades  a  perhaps)  require quite  to  person  both.  (EP)  Unless  i n the  occupational In  sense  any  assessing  about  education  which a r e the  event,  I  am  not  with  whether  right  to e d u c a t i o n - - i n the  in this  o r not  sense  dissertation.  I will or  What  content,'contain appropriate increasing  is  essential  elements  participation ability  or  t o meet  education. two  f o r example,  is  (lawyers,  evidence  person to  the  they  are  of  the  concerned  with  assume t h a t  those  here  criteria sense.  primarily to  education  senses.  in  I am  concerned  shown t o be d e f e n s i b l e  t o have a  a n a l y z e d by in  'levels.' i s that  which are on  the  between t h e s e  same a s t h e EP  Education,  to v a r y i n g degrees  educated.  be  intended  i n the educated  clear  institutional  i t can  who  some o c c u p a t i o n s  t h e m e r i t s of a r g u m e n t s f o r a r i g h t  the o c c u p a t i o n a l or  achieved  (EP)  people  of  literacy,  is  i n what t h e y have w r i t t e n , either  sense  education  there  not  have  overlap  And  advanced  or  education  considerable  toward  succeed.  contrary talking  step  to  whether  Acquiring basic  usually  to,  the  to a school  they passed  to t e l l  or the educated  there  senses  either  sense—where  system?'  It  sense  institutional  f o r example, t o r e f e r  f o r example,  mean  school  have  i s used,  i s the  the  this One  sense,  can  adhered can  be more o r  p r o g r a m s , whatever  likely part  the c r i t e r i a  P e t e r s , and  to of  of  produce the  less their  (given  student)  educated  be  an  persons.  86  For  example, a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of o u t l o o k ,  n e v e r dreamt 1966,  p.  specific  University  vocational  to  count  as  such  appropriate  1.  Argument  that  an  education. exist  they  are  to  claimed  THE  RIGHT TO  might  be  in other  to  survive  that they  secure  facilities.  vital  t o our  such At  survival  Bandman  states  t o an  education'  p.  296).  education,'  security.' education' of  by  All (p.  facts  However,  by  the  literacy  and  provided  they  seek  EDUCATION  a right  live  life.  least and  a  our the  i s to  as of  'the these  a  life  by  showing rights.  Education  chances  worth l i v i n g .  t o whatever  minimal  level  get  for l i v i n g  more rights  rights which  universal right imply  of  'the  Imber and  which a l l persons  met It i s  facilities  i s claimed  o n l y hope t h e r e  Similarly,  skills  to education  argument  have needs w h i c h must be  have r i g h t s a  a "derivative"  s o r t s of human or w e l f a r e  and  that  291). and  first  Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y ,  termed as  These would be  such  run  'derivation'  argument  these  (1977,  (Peters,  w i t h i n the c o r r e c t i o n s system  i s p o s t u l a t e d t h a t human b e i n g s  right  person  heights  criteria.  i t attempts to j u s t i f y  necessary  'set  by  i t is implicit  further  an  latterly  p a r t of a p r i s o n e r s ' e d u c a t i o n  ARGUMENTS FOR  because  educated  programs  and  which  A.  This  if  of  programs  meet t h e  It  penitentiary  of V i c t o r i a ,  examples  may  d e p i c t s an  of  178).  The  are  of, supposedly  a reaching  as  are  one  education a decent  i s to get 'in'  is  life. a  'full  education  ' i n v o l v e or  to a job,  of  to  derivative  social  right  Namenson a r g u e have a r i g h t  imply  to  to  for a have  87  the to  opportunity  to learn'  the l e a r n i n g of  complexities derived  of  (1983, p . 105).  further  modern  from t h e most  skills,  life.  and  to  The r i g h t  fundamental of a l l  These a r e e s s e n t i a l coping  with  to education  rights--the  the  i s thus  right  to  life. Discussion In  this  argument, e d u c a t i o n  major c a t e g o r y  of r i g h t .  What w o u l d happen  themselves  are subject  categorized  o f t e n a s a human  human place to  rights  'dignity' 1973,  social, and ' f r e e  and  i f these  categories  But i t h a s been  as being  by a b e l i e f cultural  seen  impractical,  in  in a right  rights  of  some  F o r example, e d u c a t i o n i s  c a t e g o r i e s i s to render  development'  forwarded  on i t s own m e r i t  education  'dependent  our  to j u s t i f y  are unlikely  that  e t c . To  i t subject  the  right  to  to r e a l i z e the  i n d i s p e n s a b l e ' f o r our personality  (Olafson,  i s contingent  upon a  allocating  particular  on t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f a p a r t i c u l a r  education  "Argument  "Arguments chapter). fundamental  education  'second  fiddle'  This  Education, right.  the  Right  to  is  not  The  location  fact  is a  Education"  right  context— and  reason  time' for  s t a t u s ' (See  i n the s e c t i o n  a s we saw i n c h a p t e r It  individual  social  or 'secondary  from R e l a t i v e Importance"  Against  a s an  t o be s u f f i c i e n t .  (Imber and Namenson, 1983, p. 1 0 3 ) .  the  under  p. 173). Arguments  right  right.  justified  F o r example, a b e l i e f  must be p r e c e d e d  'economic,  to  w i t h i n these  t h e same c r i t i c i s m .  education  to c r i t i c i s m ?  are often c r i t i c i z e d  education  i s being  in  this  t h r e e , can never  be a  necessary,  later  entitled,  for  example, f o r  88  physical  survival.  What  might  education can  be  1983, as  can  be never  justified p.  or  to  avoid  merits,  with  is  not  as a  to  and  if  a  to  and  these  have  such  grounds  of  death."  contingent  belonging  he  life,  In  right,  Namenson  days,  (1984, p;  107)  Crittenden  sees  be  another  other not  necessary  a  'Chief  of E d u c a t i o n  (1954  i t i s d o u b t f u l t h a t any expected  to succeed  t h e o p p o r t u n i t y o f an  some  sort  of  in  major  to equip  q u o t e Bandman,  in order  i t s own  survive,  of one's l i f e '  cite  on more  development,  needs e d u c a t i o n  and  i s denied  to  education  needs t o  To  complete  t o the q u a l i t y  reasonably he  Namenson,  b a s i c needs  persons  "social  justify  abilities  i n Brown v s . B o a r d  ...In  (Imber and  then  i s v i e w e d as a t o o l  one's  Imber  encomium  i t nevertheless  enhance t h e q u a l i t y  called as  although  Needs and I n t e r e s t s  right  i m p l i e s t h a t one  may  and  h i m s e l f , as a human b e i n g .  survive.  right  f u n d a m e n t a l and  be  attempts  skills  occupationally This  from  Education  vital  that  one.  whatever  develop  might  argument  category.  that  is justified  Argument  and  group'  to develop  what  words, e d u c a t i o n  This  'second  is  or b a s i c ,  water have been s a t i s f i e d ,  claiming rights  2.  instead,  fundamental,  Assuming  for  derivative  be  as a  103).  f o o d and  maintained,  or  (1977, p. be  Justice at  to  'Education  morally  to  man  493)  and 291).  able  to  Warren's ' that:  child life  education...  process  of  education  as  89  essential  to i n i t i a t e  members o f s o c i e t y i n t o  t h e ways o f  understanding,  and meanings o f s o c i e t y (1973, p . 4 7 ) .  not  education  consider  a  luxury  'necessary  i n g r e d i e n t ' ( p . 47)  thinks  certain  a  existence, engage that  to  'should  i n some form of l i b e r a l  to  be  can  realize  t o be a t l e a s t  initiated  into  oneself  have t h e r i g h t  this  He  does  'adornment,' a  education  human  but a  being.  so v i t a l  He  f o r human  have an a d e q u a t e o p p o r t u n i t y t o  education'  (p. 47).  exposed or allowed  form of e d u c a t i o n ,  'significantly  to at least  an  being  form of l i b e r a l  that everyone  one ought  or  life,  He  believes  the opportunity  i n order  t h a t one  qua human.' E v e r y o n e ought t o  o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o be e x p o s e d  t o such a  form o f e d u c a t i o n . It  is definitely  a basic education. without obtain  such  it  an  to  be  might  To while  many  given  ten d o l l a r s ,  t o i t ' (Melden,  Needs do n o t imply respond there  and  to this,  is  i t were,  (or p o t e n t i a l  the  basic  by  1979, p . 1 0 5 ) .  a  needy  plausible  Even  though  need o f s o m e t h i n g ,  i t s being  a right  of that  rights.  one  as  get  of  but ' i t i s h a r d l y  without  could  p e r h a p s no r i g h t  interests  to receive  people  I t i s a l s o i n the i n t e r e s t  suggest, a s such  person)  a l l persons,  o p p o r t u n i t i e s a s anyone e l s e as  that  be a c k n o w l e d g e d t h a t one i s i n d i r e  i s a person  needs  o f most p e o p l e  Does one r e q u i r e an e d u c a t i o n t o  s o m e t h i n g c a n be p r o v i d e d  person.  is  education.  he has a r i g h t  that  one  The p r o b l e m  f o o d and w a t e r ?  stranger that  i n the i n t e r e s t s  to satisfy  right  to  as  before,  to education,  with  these  one s h o u l d them.  that  because  same  basic  have t h e same  This establishes,  education—equality  of  90  educational  opportunity.  c l a i m s which might persons.  Argument  This  from  argument  i n terms  intrinsic basic  them e i t h e r  to certain  rights  opportunities  essential  is  being  everyone, unless Such  reasoning  morality, It  there is  and  services,  distinguish  ...If are  groups  of  argument.  everybody  their  lives it  i s a relevant seen  and  as  as  to  relevant  in  the  entitles at  least  fulfil  those  beings.  If  be made a v a i l a b l e to  the  fundamental  of  1971, p . 1 1 7 ) .  sorts  differences  to  contrary.  principle  (Wasserstom,  t o deny t o p e r s o n s t h e same  unless  This  human  reason  'the  and  has, or  else  should  o f a l l human  worth,  which everybody  provided,  can  of  be  goods  found t o  them:  particular  provided  educational  right  services  t o any o f s o c i e t y ' s  t h e y become - under the  any spec i a l  or  needs and i n t e r e s t s .  i f not r a t i o n a l i t y i t s e l f  i s 'irrational'  persons  t h e next  value  as  requirements to  education  establish  upon t h e assumed e q u a l i t y  of c e r t a i n  same  not  Equality  rests  of  underpins  possession  the  does  be made by p a r t i c u l a r  Such a r a t i o n a l e  3.  beings  It  members,  specified conditions  o f a l l members o f t h e  -  society...  (Imber and Namenson, 1983, p . 97)  Thus, a l t h o u g h e d u c a t i o n within this  a society  i s not a r i g h t  have a r i g h t  on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t  per se, a l l  individuals  to equal access to e d u c a t i o n — a n d  everyone has the r i g h t  to  be  treated  91  fairly. Pi scussion This It  argument does n o t c l a i m a d i r e c t  excludes  calling all  instead  to s p e c i f i c  that  the  i f education  right  obtaining  this  the  everyone  t o t h e same o p p o r t u n i t i e s a s t h e n e x t  person i n  one  a factor  i s being  certain  made a v a i l a b l e ,  common  properties,  possesses  of  they  worth  are being  specific education  society  then  opportunities  Argument  from  can  platform  o f human everyone  i n chapter  these  needs,  interests,  justification for affront  to  p r i s o n e r s from t h e  human  beings.  This  five.  Roles  also  equip  persons  F o r example, a t e a c h e r  in teaching  of  other  such  to others.  I t makes i t a ' g r a v e  as  If  t o b e n e f i t from  1967, p . 52) t o e x c l u d e  be d i s c u s s e d a g a i n  roles.  education.  makes,  likely  them  everyone has  i n the development  i s an a p p r o p r i a t e  to education.  of  Education  to this  made a v a i l a b l e  common value  (Cranston,  argument w i l l 4.  a  and  right  sorts  As s u c h ,  among  t o have t h e same o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o r e c e i v e  T h i s n o t i o n of  justice'  factors  the f e a t u r e s of b e i n g  advantages—if  prisoners'  the  of a c c e s s  i n the progress  a d v a n t a g e s ought  same  f o r a l l individuals to  (Imber and Namenson, 1983, p. 9 8 ) . I t  of o p p o r t u n i t y  is  dignity,  programs,  education.  same r i g h t  beings, who  educational  c a p a c i t y t o b e n e f i t from e d u c a t i o n .  education  to education.  then  Everyone possesses some  goods l i k e  f o r ' u n q u a l i f i e d access  e d u c a t i o n a l programs'  claims has  claims  right  skills  to  cope with  requires  to f a c i l i t a t e  some  her r o l e  certain kind  of  as t e a c h e r .  92  In  the  same  have r o l e s and  way,  i t i s sometimes s u g g e s t e d  a s human b e i n g s .  Two s u c h  r e s p o n s i b l e moral agent.  order  that the f u l l  considered operate  potential  as a r i g h t ,  fully  roles  a r e t h a t of  The e d u c a t i o n of these  because  one  and e f f e c t i v e l y  that  beings citizen  i s required in  r o l e s c a n be f u l f i l l e d i s  cannot  i n these  them t h e o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o d e v e l o p  t h a t human  expect  persons  r o l e s without  the c a p a c i t i e s  to  providing  f o r doing so.  Discussion The  problem with  this  argument  etc.,  i s not the only  role  t h a t human b e i n g s  have  rights  all  our  t o the e d u c a t i o n  roles.  Opportunity" everyone the  might  of c i t i z e n ,  have.  We  and knowledge n e c e s s a r y  Reference  to  "The  solve t h i s  problem.  Argument  do  to f u l f i l  from  The Argument  not  Equal  states that  s h o u l d have t h e same o p p o r t u n i t i e s a s e v e r y o n e e l s e t o  education  rights  i s that the r o l e  to  that  be  opportunities provided. many w i l l  doctors. to  be  Although  F o r example,  But  doctors such  we  do  have  in  that  do  the  medical  from  not  right  they  have  to the  education  are  c o n s i d e r e d as r e l e v a n t c r i t e r i a  A r g u m e n t s from  a) Argument  we  opportunities are available,  n o t be a b l e t o u s e them b e c a u s e  meet t h e s t a n d a r d s 5.  i s provided.  is  however,  unable  to  for entry.  Duties  the S o c i a l  Contract  b) Argument by B i r t h The  overall  disavowal corollary defence  thrust  of education duty  as  to provide  of education  by  of a  these right  education. citing  arguments because  i s t o rebut the  there  can  be  These arguments attempt  examples  of  plausible  no a  duty-  93  holders,  such  generations a)  the  government,  from The S o c i a l  argument  i s f o u n d e d upon c e r t a i n  proposes a category  Rights'"  which  belong  of r i g h t s  65).  These  we l i v e ,  'given  society  called  at  a  would  care,  also  i t s members  explain  educate  of t h e i r time'  us by t h e s o c i e t y  the  have  a  citizens  with  grounds  the  being (1978,  i n which  duty  Society, so  or  that  to  educate  for  of which  and s o c i e t y  state,  they  can  state.  a right they  They  which  provides  to this  education  are  supposedly  be It  have s u c h members.  citizens,  claiming  s o c i e t y has the  members o f s o c i e t y / t h e  to  the s t a t e  state  way.  education,  (1978, p . 6 6 ) .  t h i s agreement w h i c h  state/society  therefore  which can b e n e f i t  trial'  i t s citizens  and c o n t r i b u t i n g  benefit  benefits  to a fair  i n the f o l l o w i n g  to  responsible  Contract  t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f d i s t r i b u t i v e j u s t i c e and o t h e r  could  undertakes  bestowed  "'Social  p r i n c i p l e s . ' Examples a r e t h e ' r i g h t t o a f r e e  One  and  and i t s members.  particular  r i g h t s are guaranteed  to adequate h e a l t h  with  general,  r i g h t s being  t o i n d i v i d u a l s by v i r t u e  members o f a p a r t i c u l a r s o c i e t y  basic  in  Contract  t h e r e s u l t o f an " a g r e e m e n t " between  Peffer  p.  society  of s o c i e t y .  Argument  This as  as  members.  benefits  What  t h e members  who c o n s t i t u t e i t . A  form o f  Benefits also  to  this the  appeared  argument  occurs  in  C o l l e c t i v e " i n chapter  i n the p r e v i o u s l y  discussed  "The  five.  Argument  from  A version  of i t  "Argument  from  Roles."  Discussion The  main d i f f i c u l t y  with  this  argument  is  that  i t  may  94  presume  too  undertake  much  such  resources  on  the  tasks.  inclination  It  also  assumes  t o educate c i t i z e n s .  and  effective  sufficient  governments  guarantee  access  makes i t p o s s i b l e education  a  are a v a i l a b l e . to  claim  not  education.  to  make  have  the  At best,  then,  claims  when t i m e s  the r i g h t .  upon  this  education  of a  But even to  argument to  make  a r e p r o p i t i o u s , and r e s o u r c e s  P r i s o n e r s , f o r example, m i g h t u s e t h i s  adequate  of  or i s  resources  governments  f o r themselves  a p p e a r s t o have a d e q u a t e r e s o u r c e s , a n d i s other  availability  the right,  for  always  to  priority  guarantees  condition  do  the  I t i s as though the presence  governments p r e s u p p o s e s and f u l l y necessary  o f many governments t o  argument  i f t h e government  extending  these  to  members o f s o c i e t y , b) Argument Olafson  bringing There  by B i r t h  (1973) t h i n k s t h a t t h e r e  a  child  into  the  world  i s , in h i s opinion, also a  members  of  adulthood them  a  senior  only  through  generation  i s a duty to nurture  collective -  correlative  with  and n o u r i s h i t .  duty  incurred  by  who have managed t o r e a c h  someone f u l f i l l i n g  the duty  to  tend  to  - t o r e t u r n t h e c o m p l i m e n t by c a r i n g a n d p r o v i d i n g f o r t h e  succeeding  generation.  Discussion A flaw only  as  with  this  a recipient  argument right,  expenditure  of r e s o u r c e s '  aspect  education  of  interference,  as  i f needs be.  i s that  requiring  i t deals  'the p o s i t i v e  (1973, p . 1 7 5 ) . an  This  action right, This  with  argument  education s u p p o r t and  overlooks  requiring may  also  that  only  non-  be  more  95  appropriate persons. feel we  for  I f we  hold  are  already  not  the  or  prisoners  be  thesis  concerns prisoners  to  improve  who  are as  has  been  something does  not  eradicate  right.  Before  exercising to  moral  immature  to  responsible  to  i s not  different  category is,  the  right,  which  I  be  'generation'  generation  which  to  develop.  i s a l s o p o s s i b l e that  educated others  persons, as  well,  they thus  an  will  i t .  our  to  be  A  do  duty  p r a c t i c e of  teach  of  have a  duty  us an  it  a  freedom  first  is  to  how  to  be  essential of  duties,  also  raises  here because I  am  duties. include prisoners  i s to  receive  the  help  to h e l p  i f prisoners  consider  fulfilling  the  might  discuss  i f we  education  but  a duty  itself,  not  There  having  This question  in  requires  generation It  receive  which  them,  have  full  which  cannot  useful  reform  might  to  to  right.  need  agents.  the  one  and  our  even  superscede  education  r i g h t s to education,  the  to  thus  illiterate,  that  claim  problematic  Argument m i g h t of  of  claiming  questions  investigating The  our  only  can to  or  right  to education,  form  about  prerequisite however,  a  our  -  able  one's r i g h t  submit  adult  to c h i l d r e n .  d u t y we  reiterated  duty  being  offer  responsible  It  a  as  responsible  They w i l l  them and  we  A n o t h e r p r o b l e m a r i s e s from t h e  especially  for prisoners  sufficiently  caring that  might  educated.  so  them a_s p e r s o n s .  education  nurture  not  i n c a r c e r a t e them f o r what t h e y have done,  regarding an  but  someone to. be  i t l e g i t i m a t e to  specifically but  children,  it the  in  education, of  the  their  that older  them m a t u r e , leave  grow,  prison duty  contract  the  to  as help  between  96  generations. B.  ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE RIGHT TO EDUCATION  1.  Argument  This between in also  argument  rights  the  "Argument  of  from  education,  be  The p r o b l e m was s k e t c h e d  Specific must  against  incur  a duty  duty  of  rights  rights  the  The u n d e r l y i n g  such  positive  (Olafson,  Iti s  entitled  duties  of  as t h e r i g h t  non-interference  'requires  suffices, support  and  1973, p . 1 7 5 ) :  we c o n s t r u c t w i t h a view t o  that there  i s a right  to education  showing t h a t some p e r s o n / p e r s o n s  t o support  persons  previously  duties--specific  t h e r e may be c e r t a i n the  human  Persons/Duties."  o f r e s o u r c e s by o t h e r s '  a case  relationship  argument  where  showing  alleged  an No  ...Any c a s e  the  "The N a t u r e a n d Meaning o f R i g h t s . "  however,  expenditure  around  Education)  on  While  property  (or the Nature of  revolves  i s that rights  provision. to  Duties  and d u t i e s .  section  the crux  premise  from  and a s s i s t  f o r whom t h e r i g h t  the education  must have of the  i s claimed...  ( p . 175)  The  problem with education  where t h e s e  duties  i s that  i t is  not  possible  to  see  fall.  Discussion This recipient same  argument right.  criticism  rests  upon  a p e r c e p t i o n of education  However, a s I have a r g u e d was  made o f human r i g h t s ,  p r e v i o u s l y when recipient  as a the  rights are  97  not  the  also  only v a l i d  not  specific  the  only  regard  the  'Janus'  both  an  category  persons,  nature  can  be  of  rights.  Duties  corollaries  of  i t must a l s o  education  recipient  whether  correlative  valid  to education,  a c t i o n and  previously  of  the  State,  regarded  as  I  as  the  d u t i e s , e t c . , should  rights. be  renders  right.  of p r o v i s i o n  are  And  with  remembered  that  i t c a t e g o r i z e a b l e as  have  also  the agency agency  which  which  p r i s o n e r s be  considered imprisons  should  granted  carry  a right  to  educat i o n . 2.  Argument  This secondary  from R e l a t i v e I m p o r t a n c e  argument importance.  considerations. an  instrument  is  A right  defensible  certain As  level  -  and  if,  when  progress,  described  i n the  persons  section  on  three, education  can  because  its  dependent  is  It  because  i s u n c e r t a i n t y about  The  authenticity  that  w i t h i n the  of  also  such  be  basis, that  A right  to education  urgent as  importance on  -  other  level)  will  reached  a  development.  upon  of  rights  right  circumstances  and  as b e i n g  prima  its  i s challenged. i t s demands to c a l l  r e j e c t e d because  in  a contingent  i t s s t a t u s or  i t would be m i s l e a d i n g i s thus  basic  categories  economy of a c u l t u r e ,  fragile  this  s o c i e t i e s have  considered  rights  more  dependent  p e r c e i v e d as  situations. there  can  be  or  only  i s acknowledged  but  at the  and/or  chapter  award  not  (even  of p h y s i c a l c o m f o r t  possesses  to concede to  indeed,  to education  only  education  importance of e d u c a t i o n  of d e v e l o p m e n t to  that  I t a l w a y s has  The  subordinate  concerns. be  claims  i t is  facie  exercise.  I t i s argued have it a  such  a  right.  subject  to  98  supplanting--and can  be  so e a s i l y  rights  are  not  rights,  i t i s argued,  i f they  dismissed.  Discussion Two  counterarguments are  access  to education  represent And  a special  cannot aspect  i f i t were n e c e s s a r y  would be,  at  least  prima  Where t h e q u e s t i o n granted  be  facie, of  things  d o e s not  cast  education. its  being  other  may  A  legal  upon  mainly  right  THE  legal  they  justice.  rights  there them.  already  is a circumstantial right. shows  is  than  to education reason.  that  sometimes  education. or  can  be  The  ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE  m a j o r arguments  upon c l a i m s  i ) No  the  But  this  right  to  granted  without  same goes  for a l l  can  duty  of p r o v i s i o n  ii)  Education or  against  be  is  survival  found  have  education  education just are  right  to  EDUCATION  education  only of  upon whom t o p l a c e  of  rest  secondary  how  obstacles  necessary  importance  ways of  i n f l u e n c e the d i r e c t i o n  seen,  the  to  the  persons  These a r g u m e n t s show c l e a r l y to  a  RIGHT TO  that:  persons  welfare  we  to  of  rights.  The  As  rights  education,  e x e r c i s e d - - f o r whatever  OVERVIEW OF  right  right  because  ' p r a c t i c a l i t y , ' I have have  more i m p o r t a n t  aspersions  equality  strong grounds t o j u s t i f y  to education  be  to  dismissed,  of a f u n d a m e n t a l  Thus t h e most t h a t t h i s argument other  Rights  so e a s i l y  t o make such  i s one  that a right  possible.  some to  categorizing of one's  ways  of  the  argument.  of  these  categorizing  the  r e c o g n i t i o n of e d u c a t i o n  as  a  99  genuine only the in  right.  One  alternatives. plausibility  the  strict  certain It  the  (Flathman,  of  can  be  both  an  the  to  be  education  are  right.  Chapter  conditional  right.  such  three  not  Their  become  those  obligatory  and  and  right  i t s binary  recipient  right.  Thus process  are m i s d i r e c t e d .  main  be  as  reason  of  education  for  supersceded  this  by more  supportive  made  of  does  this  it not  clear.  rights  i s not  as  moral  right  to  contingent  make i t any The  that  compelling  the a  is,it  is  r e s o u r c e s , or a  arguments which s u p p o r t  however,  of  guaranteed  to  to  nature.  as a p a s s i v e  less  contingent,  sufficient  t h e r e good g r o u n d s t o l e g i s l a t e  a l l are  solely  reason  a or to  them.  Canada, o p p o r t u n i t i e s  But  The  s t a t u s of c e r t a i n  are  ignores  as u n a v a i l a b i l i t y  feature,  or d o u b t  protected  The can  thus mainly  This  But  'right  all  education  shown t h a t i m p o r t a n t  educated.  right.  contest  rights  action  education  considerations, to  that  or a  in  CHAPTER  has  undisputed  right  duty  i n order then  the  is interested right  to r e f u t e education  THE  chapter  an  ways as  a legal  that r e s t r i c t i n g  recipient  CONCLUSION TO  not  be  thesis  persons  o n l y d u t i e s of p r o v i s i o n  This  this  1976)  specific  suggested  arguments which attempt  is  example,  these  bodies.  category  eliciting  however, a c c e p t  t h a t e d u c a t i o n can  d u t i e s of  is also  Education  For  sense'  'troublesome' for  need n o t ,  so  access by  favoured. education  the  to  law  such  education  a right?  are  at  the  seemingly  f o r t h e m a j o r i t y of  P r i s o n e r s are p r e s e n t l y most  is  a  In  persons.  excluded.  moral  right.  100  Similarly,  other  developed,  but  g o o d n e s s and  see  along  that  persons  they  wish  harm for  education  following  should  others,  have t h e  J . S.  or  Mill  right  be  affluent  have  asserts  disadvantage  others.  d i s c u s s i o n so  a  as  in  he  out  of  however, t h i s  good o n l y  for that p o r t i o n is  'On  them  right  t o do  particular  not  of so  a  an  be  and moral  so as  a  not  argument  to  as  educate  they  right  right  population  appropriate  i t does  i s an  categories  k i n d of  is  This  such  valid  it  as  long  should  that  want  do  not  because  of  rights.  to education  able  be  maintained  long  people  can  education  Liberty'  (1973). If  right  i t can  w i s h e s , as  shown t o be  Because,  it  First,  f a r would support  r i g h t s have been  themselves,  for a legal  to obtain  to non-interference. they  action  may  something p r o v i d e d  a case  inconvenience  themselves,  The  as  world  lines.  f o r anyone t o do  a right  the  however, t h a t  the  i t .  legitimate  of  obligation.  I propose, made  parts  to  is  educate  in s i t u a t i o n s requiring  guidance. What to claims a  right  other  i s proposed  instead  for a  to education,  of p e r s o n s t o r e c e i v e t h e  persons,  necessary beings  right  i s that  to  have t h e  and  one  of  is  a right  the  in p a r t i c u l a r , the  status  right  ways t h a t  to e q u a l i t y  opportunities  to  i t i s hard same k i n d of  opportunities  and  t o be  dignity  treated with  such a r i g h t  of  education  although  t o argue  to  being  against  acquire  of p e r s o n s . dignity  In  exist  opportunities  other  provided,  as  things  A l l human  and  i s manifested  opportunity. are  b a r r i e r s do  respect,  for  persons  words,  if  a l l persons  101  should  have  t h e same k i n d  There w i l l extend  this  already  right  the  of  evident  real high  of  fees  responsible  a limited  imply  that  their  right  to  elite  other  imposition  outposts.  an  opportunities  show  education  for  assume  they  the r i g h t  that  they  For  many  fees.  are  In t h i s  imposition  education, the  those  rights  education—but  of only  does not n e c e s s a r i l y  right,  but r a t h e r  are i n far-flung i n making  of are  these not  that  unable rural  education  persons  excluded  to from  to education. i s about  and  people  who  f o r prisoners, that  the  one  could  were u n i v e r s a l l y , o r even  i n the  social  prisoners.  are  advocates  the p r i s o n  betterment  r i g h t s to education  that  This  have  because as  the  violating  of the government,  ensuring  the educational  legal  because  p r i s o n s and j a i l e r s  main, p l a c e s  if  to  society  The same goes f o r p e r s o n s  t o honour  this dissertation  that  toward  education  by  tuition  that  p e r s o n s do n o t have t h i s  to others,  education,  rising  i t .  of  instance,  from a h i g h e r  to afford  violated.  difficulties  as f a r c i c a l ,  for  are  wishes  discussions.  They a r e p r o v i d i n g  I t i s the duty  available  But  able  i s being  receive  t o meet  one  t h a t members  to education  i s b a r r i n g t o o many  p e r s o n s t o an e d u c a t i o n . to  the c l a i m  i t c a n be c o u n t e r e d  for this  if  previous  education,  by an i n a b i l i t y  persons.  Many o f t h e s e  through  higher  instance,  as other  difficulties  to prisoners.  of o p p o r t u n i t y  case  restricted very  be  some m i g h t c o n s i d e r  have a r i g h t in  naturally  become  example,  of a c c e s s  If  of  things  s y s t e m b e n t much  of the inmates,  then  w o u l d be much weakened.  circumstances  of  prisons  like effort  the case But i f we and  the  1 02  attitudes be  of  given  their jailers  either  interference, education  a  the  t h e n we  legal  makes i t u n l i k e l y t h a t  needed have a t  right.  f a c i l i t i e s or least a  prisoners  suitable  plausible  freedom  case  to  will from make  1 03  V. Chapter legal  THE RIGHT OF PRISONERS TO EDUCATION four  right to  set  education.  established  social  right  prisoners.  of  educational  investigates  to  range of arguments t o support a  institution, We  education  have  reviewed  as p r e p a r a t i o n  the s p e c i f i c  can  we  for prisoners  Only  then w i l l  the  same  the  an  arguments  c a s e of p r i s o n e r s . Only  expect  to  established  become  (as w i t h  when  generally  f o r reviewing  reasonably  prisoners  'recourse  is  i t i s n o t commonly a c c e p t e d as a  the grounds f o r such a c l a i m .  grounds  education  a  While  rights generally  applicability  such  out  other  their  a  This if  their chapter  there  uniform and  for  are  system of accepted.  members of s o c i e t y )  valid  claims  have  go u n s a t i s f i e d '  (Imber and Namenson, 1983, p . 1 0 2 ) . Certain I.  i s s u e s must  first  I t must be shown t h a t  incompatible.  This  be s e t t l e d : education  involves  and p u n i s h m e n t  clarifying  the  are  not  meaning  of  punishment. II.  I t must a l s o be shown t h a t  functions This  education  of i n c a r c e r a t i o n as t h e s e l e c t e d  involves  education,  clarifying  the  and t h e n d i s c u s s i n g  meaning  can  enhance  the  form of p u n i s h m e n t .  of  incarceration,  t h e ways e d u c a t i o n  and  can c o n t r i b u t e  toward a b e n e f i c i a l i n c a r c e r a t i o n . I. In  EDUCATION AND order  to  accommodated w i t h i n differentiate punishment.  PUNISHMENT  show a  between  how  period the  a of  right  to  education  punishment,  meaning  P u n i s h m e n t , as most a p t l y  and pointed  we  can  must  first  justification out  by  be  of  Peters  104  (1966,  p.  who  done s o m e t h i n g  has  173),  justifiably one  be  else.  means i m p o s i n g wrong.  imposed  Lucas  something This  upon a g u i l t y  (1971)  and  u n p l e a s a n t on  unpleasantness party,  Quinton  someone  can  the o f f e n d e r ,  only and  no  (1969) a r e o f t h e same  opinion. Criteria activity if  are a v a i l a b l e  as p u n i s h m e n t .  which  can  A period  of  or  to  incarceration  identify is  an  punishment  painful  b) F o r t h e r e a s o n of an c) Of  persons g u i l t y  offence  of the  offence  d) D e l e g a t e d by an a p p r o p r i a t e (Benn  and  Peters,  we  may  have d i f f i c u l t y  While  something dealing  why  with l e g i t i m a t e  have  is  violated  demands t h a t  o t h e r s honor  argued  have  Prisoners t o engage  that  in certain I  full  shall  bring  Not  or  in criminal  whether  that  we  are  punishment. b e g i n s when we q u e s t i o n  everyone,  however,  agrees  that  because  of o t h e r s i n t h e i r  criminal  Goldman  a l l their the  assume  c a s e s of  the r i g h t s lost  cases deciding  argues  forfeited formerly  punishment activity.  their held upon  Other  legitimate  rights'  (1979,  themselves writers  by  have  n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g the n a t u r e of p r i s o n e r s '  prior  must  be  restriction  liberty  and  punishment their  174).  needed.  'they  43).  authority  such a p r a c t i c e  activities,  choosing  p.  should e x i s t .  justification  prisoners  and  for  such a p r a c t i c e  that  1959,  c o u n t s as p u n i s h m e n t ,  Justification  of  used  i tis: a) U n p l e a s a n t  p.  be  justified an  because  infliction  i t involves a  of u n p l e a s a n t n e s s upon  acts,  them.  105  I adhere t o the Clearly,  some  society's  disapproval  that  view  action  punishment  is  that  must  justification  i s necessary.  be t a k e n t o d e m o n s t r a t e  o f t h o s e who b r e a k effective  in  i t s laws.  enforcing,  a s y s t e m o f law, c o n v e n t i o n s , c u s t o m s ,  principles  (1971, p. 2 3 0 ) .  is  viewed as 'part  known what  to a social  communicating  them  maintain  compensate  order'  law  and  prisoners will These  are  punishment  order.  realize  some  (1969, p. 2 9 2 ) .  punishment  part  want t o  incarcerate during but  must  of  of  to  is  the  and know how  to avoid  persons.  or l e v y i n g  hope  that them.  The form w h i c h  of f i n e s ,  etc.,i s  the  meaning  prisoners  The p a i n  differentiated  from  n e v e r s e t s o u t t o be d e l i b e r a t e d l y  them f o r p u n i s h m e n t ,  sort  also  conceptually  Punishment  educate  this period.  this  be  or p a i n f u l .  deliberate  rules,  these aims.  because education  unpleasant  cannot  errors  be i t d e t e n t i o n ,  meted o u t t o r e a l i z e Education  Important  their  these  needs  c r i m e s , and t o m o t i v a t e them t o  reasons f o r punishing  takes,  i t makes  what t h e r u l e s a r e , s o m e t h i n g  for their  or  f o r G a h r i n g e r , punishment  t o be done t o d i s c o u r a g e p e o p l e f r o m b r e a k i n g make  claims  r u l e s or moral  o f t h e l a n g u a g e o f t h e law,' b e c a u s e  ' i s essential  Besides  Lucas  inculcating,  expressing  Similarly,  effectively  does and  of punishment. as  Pain We  punishment.  and t h e n p o s s i b l y  of punishment  incidental  must.  side-effect  is  a  definitely Rather  we  e d u c a t e them  may t e a c h a  lesson,  i s not c o n s i d e r e d as  education. Education carrying  c a n , however, c o n t r i b u t e  o u t o f some o f t h e o b j e c t i v e s  to  a  more  of punishment.  successful One t h u s  106  educates For  in order  education  f u t u r e crime  and  inherent kinds  are  Chapter  in this and  of  two  a Christian  the  error  punishment. prisoners  reformed'  protect  is  are  from  a  focus  For  hopes t h a t  that  such of  of  is,  on  certain thought  into  seeing  Of  course  education  result  punishment  of  or  treating  conditions  of a p e r s o n  of  being  by  of c r i m e , on  the  is  justifiable  to  l a r g e , to p r o t e c t c r i m i n a l s b e n e f i t s t o s o c i e t y on  deterrent  i s now  focussed  22).  either  arranging  agent  I f o f f e n d e r s and  role  INCARCERATION  can  potential  then  form o f p u n i s h m e n t , t h a t of EDUCATION AND  p.  being  i t was  persons  1978,  them  178). that  a  been  through  i s some p o s s i b i l i t y  p.  life  sometimes  example,  hoped-for  c r i m i n a l s at  as  'put  II.  elaborates  hope of making  character  'reform'  It i s j u s t i f i e d  premise.  The  offenders  r a t h e r of a change  historically  outcome the  'there  from  utilitarian  specific  only  a l s o made  society  off'  one  the  (OISE R e v i e w ,  It  Education  run.  ways  guaranteed  themselves.  whole.  fulfilled.,  which  'reform'  of  would  the  that  in  programs.  ( P e t e r s , 1966,  Claims  result  term  changes  education  their  so  s e e n how  i s the  Reform has  'constructively,'  punishment  be  be present  section  punished  "educational"  i s not  can  to discourage  In t h e  showed t h e  intrinsic  that  reform  also  context.  of  goals  reasoning.  Prisoners  used  is said  more c r i m e s .  from  perspective  better.  these  for prisoners, i t w i l l  deterrence  long  some of  example, p u n i s h m e n t  from committing  from  that  help  the  serve  this  offenders  are  s o c i e t y b e n e f i t s i n the of  education  incarceration.  within  a  107  I n c a r c e r a t ion Incarceration fines,  flogging,  imprisonment  is  r e f e r s t o the  During  this  other  rights  period  those chapter  two  to  states  who  are  Payette and  are  Incarceration  or  isolation  removed from n o r m a l lose  their  to p r o t e c t  a t t r i b u t e d to  revealed  be  the  imposed  society.  liberty  and  institution  and  punishment.  incarceration.  r e f o r m , and  The  40).  all The  is  only  and  Common  are  rehabilitation  (see  benefit at  'prison  discussion  envisaged  as  being  'heart  to  being  able  been  the  type  commitment  'provide  education  (1980, p.  of  on  about  of  the  the  2).  to b e n e f i t  the  inmates Hervieux-  function,'  business'  kind  to  genuine  to  prison  is educational  focusses  always  T r a i n i n g D i v i s i o n of  vocational  business now  and  from them'  the  are  seriousness  as  and  has  questions  the  .mission  sees e d u c a t i o n  education  Education  f o r academic to  that The  provided  their  able  that  which  kinds  incarceration is their  protection,  implementation.  opportunities  p.  are  relative  they  necessary  for prisoners.  education  CSC  of  Other  two).  advocated  its  period  of  punishment.  quartering.  isolation,  period  custody,  Chapter  of  of  This  functions of  of  which they are  thought  society.  Certain  kind  s t a r v a t i o n , and  upon p e r s o n s d u r i n g  the  a  of  (1981,  education  prisoners  during  incarceration. Education "Education" is  used  to  can  pick  be out  produce c e r t a i n kinds  of  quite  an  ambiguous t e r m .  institutions learning  i n or  or by  Sometimes  it  programs o r g a n i z e d  to  people.  In  addition,  108  it  i s used  etc.,  to refer  The  area  processes, criteria  which  change  nor merely  eminently  the  and  development' These prison  Persons'  better.  uniquely  education.  change  commit  judgements,  They w i l l  to u t i l i t a r i a n  or f i e l d .  is  a  learning  They  knowledge desirable  i n i t s essence'  with  possess  or v o c a t i o n a l  and u s e t h i s  intended  'Education  without  can o f f e r  them  providing  life.  ' i s pre-  and  human  a sound r a t i o n a l e f o r i t would be odd  to  some o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r  I t w o u l d be o d d n o t t o t r y t o  i n some way t o d e c r e a s e  their  propensity  crimes. educational requirements  example, common p r o g r a m s  Education,  and  literacy.  are  in  a  vary,  a n d so do p r o g r a m s .  lifeskllls,  These p r o g r a m s do good  No one c a n deny t h e a d v a n t a g e s  becoming  seen  1985, p . 1 9 ) .  to non-criminal  Prisoner  ways.  actions,  I t h a s been m e n t i o n e d how  or develop  is  of e x c e l l e n c e — e s s e n t i a l l y  result  of e d u c a t i o n  persons  activities,  t o some d e g r e e t h e  education.  concerned  approach.  Such a p e r s o n  conduct,  by t h e i r  The o v e r a l l  notions  adaptation  standards  f o r the b e t t e r '  tasks,  fulfil  is.  maturation,  latter  knowledge o f one d i s c i p l i n e  (Cosman,  incarcerate  this  to e x p l a i n , understand,  contexts. for  person  certain  growth,  constitutes  i s not r e s t r i c t e d  a l s o be a b l e  other  adopts  help persons  feelings are affected  will  For  to  excellences.  purposes,  to  education  designed  knowledge  in  of  of  u s , 'some change  The d i s s e r t a t i o n  achieved  cognitive  kinds  tells  o f what an e d u c a t e d  have  and  certain  i m p l y i n g as P e t e r s  (1966, p . 1 7 8 ) .  to  to  more m a r k e t a b l e p e r s o n .  of b e i n g  Basic  Adult  in their  literate,  Sometimes t h e s e  or  own in  s k i l l s are  109  all  a person  requires  is,  education  i s not  is  a l s o not  ...a  just  a c t i v e moral  provided  intellectual As  Training  and  besides  not not  not  Thus  be  and  for character,  It  must  be  not  oriented  to  out  of  is  the  their  particularly provide  be  be  merely content' to provide  being  proposed  which a p r i s o n e r  a  those  prisoners.  that  p e r s o n s how  read  or  to  lifeskills  (Duguid,  (Duguid,  for  i t is possible  for  1981,  which  1981, way  frames h i s / h e r  p. of  life  as  thinking p.  100).  with opportunities  decisions  as  delivery  for  'education  prisoners  in future,  for  i f some  w i t h much s c o p e  literacy  must  i s that  opportunities  But  and  information.  danger  prisoners  must  minds  desirable  persons.  it  they  aims b e y o n d t h e  sufficient  further criminal activity'  Education context  be  their  just acquiring  before,  education  'make d i f f e r e n t d e c i s i o n s lead  of  to develop persons,  c o n v e y e d when t e a c h i n g  whether  penitentiary  It  activity  develop  extend  'educated'  abilities  write.  content,  as  capacities  to  cautioned  p r o g r a m s may  the  attempt  c h a n g e s deemed as  development thinking  abilities,  may  skills.  training.' It i s :  intellectual  opportunities  there  f a c t s and  thing  22)  i s to t r u l y  been  of  The  judgement...  p.  p r o g r a m s do  skills, of  1985,  has  education  or  f o r dynamic  a non-criminal.  teaching  developing  and  be  sorts  of  student  education  of  j u s t the  the  If  s u r v i v a l as  'schooling  matter  (Cosman,  for  will  to not  136).  enlarging  the  decisions.  1 10  This  context  criminal and  choices.  reasons  education thinking  contain,  for  I t i s believed  example,  that  dominates a l a r g e expanse of t h i s  and r e a s o n i n g . as  intellectual  being  Other  stimulation,  social  or  .  economic  lack  .  .  of  context  opportunity,  familial  factors  (Ross  thus  t o improving  upon t h i s  this are  limited  factors,' and  to  thinks  c o n t e x t , and  largely  influences  'poverty,  alternatives  t h e way a p r i s o n e r  p r o g r a m s s h o u l d be d i r e c t e d  suggested  other  might  amidst  Fabiano,  1985,  p. 1 1 ) . Education alter  may n o t change s u c h  t h e way a p e r s o n  responds  factors  t o such  formed  attitudinal and  (Duguid,  Ross  and  behaviour understands  decisions  Fabiano  also  is  prisoners'  the  and  people  e t h i c a l , and Change  that  follow...  like. who have  On  the  of  root  the  other persons'  these  idea  that  view  One would e x p e c t  We do have some  that  suggest  considers  components w h i c h a d d r e s s  be  should  part  1981, p . 153)  (1985, p . 1 1 ) .  should  by t h e c o g n i t i v e ,  make-up o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l .  different  possibly  in specific  and t h o s e d e c i s i o n s a r e i n l a r g e  and d e t e r m i n e d  can  situations:  . . . C r i m i n a l s a c t by making d e c i s i o n s situations  but i t  of  world,  feelings,  criminal how  s/he  and v a l u e s  e d u c a t i o n a l programs t o c o n t a i n  factors.  what  programs  to  accomplish  t h e one hand, we have e m p i r i c a l  followed certain  this  evidence  t y p e s o f p r o g r a m s of s t u d y  111  have  changed  grounds  i n t h e s e ways.  for believing  that  On  the other  p r o g r a m s must  whose m a s t e r y c o m p r i s e t h e v e r y Perhaps argument  set out  argument c a n be, do  is  best by  that  t h e main  achieved'  judgement, According degree Examples  ways of  involving  to H i r s t ,  philosophy  Hirst's  Such  program  a  development through  and  is  because  substantial  impact  and  These  of i n f o r m a t i o n . ' experience  i t s u n i q u e grammar  focus legal  on p r i s o n e r s '  on  and  p. 38).  considerable  understanding. mathematics  by a s t a n d a r d  traditional  i t s central  For  as  has  imagination,  (1974,  forms o f such  typified  particularly  and  They a r e  w h i c h man  of c r e a t i v e  basic  forms  or  p. 4 6 ) .  aim  m a t t e r s may outlook,  in  represent it  which  liberal  the  diverse does  to  prisoners' of  mind  various  forms  provides  potential  ways o f  thinking  seem p l a u s i b l e  directly  arts  disciplines.  i s the development  such d i s c i p l i n e s  example, forms  humanities  advantageous  immersion  because they  experience.  gist  i s the  which  skills'  disciplines'  Involvement with  development  ethical  the  exposure  knowledge. for  in a l l these  ideas are best  containing  The  idea  'forms of knowledge'  t h e 'development  1974,  program,  this  this  E a c h f o r m has  communicative  materials  of  'understanding  'distinct  (Hirst,  of  an e d u c a t e d p e r s o n would have a  mastery  are  those  logical  seek.  (1974).  'collections  p. 38).  thinking,  of  Hirst  have  be c o n v e y e d t h r o u g h l e a r n i n g . mere  (1974,  terminology,  example  there are c e r t a i n  represent  include  c h a n g e s we  recent  Paul  i n d e e d , must  not  rather  the  hand, we  that  of  a  address  social,  have more c o n s i d e r a b l e  positive  perceptions,  and  attitudes.  1 12  A p a r t i c u l a r example of  Victoria  University.  from  suffer  moral,  social  skills,  reasoning  1980,  5).  p.  connection program  1973,  A  from  certain  prisoners.  Similar  University  i n Quebec and  expected  goal it  of  can  changes bringing  be  world,  ability their  development  of  about  and  inclinations  responsible it  the  reasoning  of  thinking  there  abilities  in  run  to  geared  way  prisoners  more  rational  their  world.  increase ability'  is  not  wonders.  But about  to achieve For  this  example,  understand beings  It  and  level  (1981, p.  at  an  least  through  thinking  the  with  may  crime,  'the  Laval  bring  in prisoners.  of  by  It  work  avoid  a  Ontario.  designed  to  is  The  panacea.  be  (Duguid,  in society.  are  will  are  patterns  can  that  in  that  intellectual,  area  these  programs  Fraser  assumption  behaviour  t h e y can  into  Simon  i n the  made  itself  to understand  moral  is  such changes  them  University  role-taking a b i l i t i e s  as  t o change t h e  specifically,  knowledge and  by  in persons,  designed  strengthen  More  proposed  the by  i n the  augment  facilities  developing  increased  and  by  the  Queen's U n i v e r s i t y  education  because e d u c a t i o n a l desirable  and  University  i s not  that  example,  skills  rebuild  on  deficits  f u r t h e r assumption such  run 1984,  operates  abilities,  to  Education  since  spheres—for  between  aims  program  and  Such a p r o g r a m  prisoners and  i s the  the  acting.  of  ethical  143).  Discussion The of  above d i s c u s s i o n  education  have a  in prisons.  r i g h t to  this  focussed It  education.  on  i s not It  the being  is  w o r k i n g s of stated  claimed  that that  a  concept prisoners prisoners  1 13  have  a  right  education—in the be  to a worthwhile, the  underlying has  same way  p r i n c i p l e s of  j u s t been  outlined  concept  of  diverse  education  example,  education  cognitive  p.  103),  social CSC,  or  and  thinking the  p.  8)  Evaluations University Ayers,  of  the  et  al.,  ...that  our  Some  of  the to  reasoning*  on  the  previously  report  any  the  of  the  the  For  development  (Dennison,  1980,  development  (Education  of  and  Training,  educational  programs.  mentioned  Simon F r a s e r  and  system.  structured  to other  might  programs  University  changes  in  at  (Ayers, attitudes  occupational  the 1981; and  stability.  states:  e x - s t u d e n t s who  t h e m s e l v e s as  A p a r t i c i p a n t of  of  education  underpin  within  m a t u r a t i o n , and  s o c i e t y have  ( D u g u i d and  can  understanding'  1981)  values,  Elsewhere Ayers  moral  and  system  principles  'commitment  transferable  of V i c t o r i a  perspectives,  into  and  the  s o r t of  These  found  'emphasis  are  this  support  s u c h as  interpersonal  1985,  what  programs  uniform  non-prisoners obtain.  above.  they  principles  of  that  a d e q u a t e , and  .  .  .  re-established  responsible  Hoekama,  have gone back  persons...  1985,  p.  198)  a U n i v e r s i t y p e n i t e n t i a r y program  tells  it:  ...enables p r i s o n e r s some c o n s i d e r a t i o n  .  to give .  .  'going s t r a i g h t ' helps  men  develop  a  us  that  114  perspective  which p e r m i t s  not  individuals  only  (Duguid Fox  as and  Hoekama,  informs  us  them t o see  but  1985,  that  194)  evidence  programs, b e s i d e s  'enhance  prisoner self-respect,  regarding  their  and  b e n e f i t s of e d u c a t i o n  social  isolation  1986,  These  statements  isolated  or  evaluations  dismal  and  chiefly talk  thoughts  world  the  but  of work  and  society...  be  accused  statements.  of It  education, 1978,  p.  being seems  here  too  and  44).  either  flimsy,  that  'Useful  elsewhere,  are  Worse, t h e r e  i s the  Martinson  (1974)  by  works.' of  upon e v i d e n c e ,  benefits.  according  safeguarded  the  on  benefits  benefits. by  dissertation,  or e m p i r i c a l d a t a .  rights  Sometimes,  example, w e l f a r e t o be  may  (OISE Review,  premises  of  stimulate prisoner  much q u o t e d o p i n i o n r e p r e s e n t e d  'nothing The  t o the  of c o r r e c t i o n a l  lacking'  skills,  51)  random  sadly  that  p.  that  work  realistic  s t r u c t u r e s of  (Fox,  indicate  incarcerated offenders,  access  opportunity  prisoners'  reduce  g i v e s o f f e n d e r s new,  the  which  community':  ...the  non-criminal  exists  developing  i n the  of  citizens...  p.  education  future  as  themselves  rights.  the are  basis  however, do I t does of  claimed  They a r e c o n s i d e r e d But  the  right  seem  the as  not odd  to  evidence rights,  important  i s not  rest  of for  enough  accorded  upon  1 15  evidence right.  that It i s  persons.  these derived  The  have s i m p l y benefits,  as persons.  the awarding  principles  is  this  actually  an a r e a  need n o t be v i s i b l e .  will  has  both  'task'  tasks.  is  changes  i s being  beneficial  not  however,  education,  geared  to  guaranteed  develop  through  There  one  or  may  Ill.  have a r i g h t  through  One c a n  to  hope  for  in certain  as  be g a i n s w i t h o u t  when  success,  because i t  ways, c a n be  that  prisoners  This  already  especially  to  rights.  avoid crime.  in itself,  not  presupposed  i s some e v i d e n c e  to success,  success,  mentioned.  i n an a r e a  pains.  like  Some more  a r g u m e n t s a r e now d i s c u s s e d . ARGUMENTS FOR PRISONERS' RIGHT TO EDUCATION  Some o f t h e f o u n d a t i o n s been d i s c u s s e d , b r i e f l y , 1.  persons  education  where t h e r e c a n n o t  appropriate  in  difficult  senses.  asserted, therefore, that education,  i s n o t an argument  cannot  decisive  and o p p o r t u n i t i e s , b u t  Thus, a l t h o u g h  to prisoners.  helped  to  experience the  desired  i s n o t a major c o n s i d e r a t i o n when a c c o r d i n g  usually  for  f o r persons  i s not  and ' a c h i e v e m e n t '  undertaking  It  respect  As m e n t i o n e d p r e v i o u s l y a s w e l l ,  Success  One  happens  The  success.  are  as  having the  where i t i s e x t r e m e l y  evidence.  to tasks, a c t i v i t i e s  is  from  a r e c o n s i d e r e d as v i t a l  have r i g h t s  this  such  One hopes e v e r y b o d y  also  relevant  education  accrue  of the r i g h t .  Education  education  from  benefits  b u t whether  to c o l l e c t  b e n e f i t s do i n d e e d  Education  punishment,  as  well  to  these  have  already  that:  can f i t i n t o as  arguments  be  the j u s t i f i c a t o r y a  worthwhile  framework o f  component  of  11 6  incarceration. 2.  E d u c a t i o n must be  serious  and  3.  consistent  If  and  a  right,  prisoners,  fairness  chapter  one,  that  (Mabbott,  in  1973,  Scharf's  an  of  prison  breaking food p.  or  no  are  prima  a v a i l a b l e to a l l facie  i s concerned  reason that  to  justice  now  examined:  premise, with  first  the  l o s s of  stated  in  liberty  is  or  of  or  of  . of  books  inhumane.  Association  that  law,  health  be  there  is  unjust...  Policy  Ministry i s no  The Paper  of  the  legal  British on  the  Columbia Rights  of  S o l i c i t o r - G e n e r a l as  authority  for  further  punishment. (1981)  argument  from R a w l s i a n  (1971)  p r i n c i p l e s , or  social  'original  is deprivation  383)  (1981) q u o t e s t h e  restrictions  moral  of  1973,  Liberties  derived  ensure  Incarceration  p u n i s h m e n t would  stating,  is  incarceration  f o r the  deprivation  Prisoners  r i g h t to  punishment:  liberty  Civil  there  i s b a s e d upon t h e  ...the essence  Further  education  e s p e c i a l l y i f one  from  argument  sufficient  to  arguments are  Argument  This  a legal  prevail.  Some o t h e r 1.  as  implementation.  opportunities  human b e i n g s as exclude  recognized  p o s i t i o n . ' This  in support  philosophy. p r a c t i c e s , are  of  such a p o s i t i o n i s  It best  is a hypothetical  is  argued  decided situation  that  through where  11 7  persons rules,  (that and  operate what by  is  rational  practices,  under  their  a  own  which w i l l  'veil  of  everyone  l o s s e s and  harms, and  particular  condition'  philosophy  to punishment,  not  harmful of  be  'lost.'  (Scharf,  society,  inmate  their  that  or how  Because  no  one  (Scarf, Scharf  Rights p.  as  the  'unless society  1981,  p.  suggests  t o be  not  would be is  know  affected 'similarly major  schemes  'to favour  234).  Applying  the  right  forsaken are  Thus r i g h t s  right  to education,  show them  do  They  p r o t e c t i o n from  82).  can  society.  everyone  would d e s i g n  principles,  i s , they  these  would want t o e n s u r e  1982,  such  govern  be,  make.  situated,'  meet t o c h o o s e  ignorance,'  positions will  the d e c i s i o n s they  need  agents)  to  only  this  education  those  granted  his  deemed  to the  must b e l o n g  rest to  the  incompatible  with  common  incarceration  ought  not  welfare.' In  this  deprive  argument,  p r i s o n e r s of any  a p e r i o d of more r i g h t s  t h e p u r p o s e of p u n i s h m e n t . does n o t  entail  A p e r i o d of liberty,  losing  or a c c e s s  There  no  especially  as has  change.  or  to  must be  of  of  fulfil  of  others  1979, the  sufficient  is a right  throughout,  benefit  of e d u c a t i o n  Standards  loss  to  p.  being  even  them. perhaps  being  persons.  s e t , and  education  kept  two  ignored  shelved to,  right, can  be  suggested for  should to  to  punishment.  other  Chapter  44).  right  t o d e p r i v e p r i s o n e r s of t h i s  been e m p h a s i z e d  perhaps  the  rights  (Goldman,  c o n s i d e r e d as  then  designed  likelihood  priorities,  be  with  i s necessary  specific  rights'  to education  reason  specifically the  one's own  thus  Education, is  'Violating  incarceration,  should  than  to  other  policies  ensure  that  118  programs  are  worthwhile 2.  consistently  Argument  and  potent  cold  of  an  8)  it  also help  (1973, p. for  looks  cites  d'etre  activities  of  of  of  prison  adequate  What  a  i s quoted  with  s/he  entered,  they  remaining morally  provided  be  the  The reasonable constantly prisoners  p.  and  it  will  effects makes  'the  179). the  If this  be  most  influence they  i s the  work a g a i n s t  attention  men  Eisenberg  i s such t h a t  taken  must case,  its  paid  by  this  Duguid  with  'the  a  that  for  as  very  to  the  (1980, p.  37)  same s o c i a l  interim  to  period  continuing  this  an  returning  from s o c i e t y . '  to ensure  opportunities  regarded  during  'faces  alienated  be  c r i m e , and  happens  leaving prison  with  (1966,  itself  a criminal  spent,  terms  i t s moral codes.  committing  Scharf  steps  prison  (1961) p r e m i s e t h a t  that  that  Peters  i n c a r c e r a t i o n can  world.  important.  and  deleterious  thought  i t s inhabitants  unless  between  abiding  educational  imprisonment.  A period period  259),  upon  though the  the  f o r example,  Goffman's  become p a r t  as  raison  truly  Punishment  ameliorate  estrangement'  institution  inevitably  E f f e c t s of  Nietzsche  device  (1985, p.  from The  can  punishment.  hard  by  goals.  Education of  directed  the is  very  as  saying  conscience'  probability  I t seems o n l y  interim period  education  law-  and  of  logical is well-  reform  being  prisoner.  importance state  of  upheld  of  ensuring  mind' as  that  (Mabbott,  1970,  a sound o b j e c t i v e  undergo w i t h i n  i s so  likely  prisoners  to  of  p.  383)  leave  'in a  has  been  incarceration.  influence  what t h e y  What are  1 19  like  when  they  influencing Education  come  out.  persons  for  thus  ...  At  becomes an  the very  experience return put  Education that  i n t h e way  Belstead,  can  be  i t i s 'our  of  punishment  a  duty  be  goals  as  geared  little  situation. protecting fail  even  returning  Imprisonment society  incarcerated'  (Task  and  these  lacks  social,  makes t h e  be  might  i n t h i s purpose offenders  of  the  key  serve  'secure  and  statement  p r i s o n e r s ' (Duguid  through  negative  to  effects?  programs?  'the e l e m e n t s of  produce  might  such  control,  prisoner  Education  not  does not  76).  43).  effects  traditional.prison  p.  p.  suggested  i s s o , can  such  as one  (1981,  than  been  for p r i s o n e r s to c l a i m a r i g h t  required for i n t e l l e c t u a l ,  else  also  If t h i s  experience  A  so...  the d e m o r a l i z i n g  to ameliorate  and  to  actively  I t has  89).  to education  custody  f o r him  i t must  means.  p.  the  discussed.  69).  grounds  to Ayers,  beyond  p.  been  for  incarceration:  t h e means of d o i n g  1929,  t h i s mean a r i g h t According  of  education  offender's prison  to counterattack'  (Ewing, used  a s s e t of  indeed  of t h e s e  duty  programs which a r e Can  an  of  has  make i t i m p o s s i b l e  1980,  one  better  important  least,  must not  potential  the  t o t h e community:  him  (Lord  The  and  factor  to  society  the  Force,  1984,  p.  growth'  that  'prisons  Hoekama,  1985,  in changing  this  confinement,' goal  i s met  49).  worse  any  moral  i t s most u s e f u l  i f this  set  f u n c t i o n by  but  'at the for  it  will  expense  having  of  been  1 20  - and  3.  Argument  The  main p o i n t  human b e i n g s  rational has  agents,  been v i e w e d  responsible then,  can  Walker,  as  -  are  who  'rational,  be  of  the  responsibility,'  and  and  those  have  own. the  who The  point  rules  their  prisoner  is  by  of  odd  rules  as  Criminal  of  course,  Punishment, persons  irresponsibly  no  the  punishing  fault  of  to  1973,  be  their  violate Thus,  are capable p.  by v i o l a t i n g  therefore,  treated  rules.  who  some  used  and  to f o l l o w  them.  I t ought,  toward  this  A  law.  to  help  therefore,  end.  of  95).  more r e s p o n s i b l e b e i n g s , t o h e l p them see  rules,  is  p r i s o n e r s are  unjustifiably  (Gert,  (1969,  179).  pointless  of  says  of p u n i s h m e n t  (1965, p.  be  are  truth,'  punished'  to c l a i m  t h o s e who  programs which a r e d i r e c t e d  upheld  such'  those v i o l a t o r s  the  have a c t e d  become  of the  degrade  be  of punishment ought,  prisoners  contain  only  actions  might  A period  point  can  be  wrong t h r o u g h  on  prisoner  o f o f f e n d e r s t o be  I t would  done s o m e t h i n g of p u n i s h m e n t  only  are  The  5).  a semantic  i s to d i s c o u r a g e the v i o l a t i o n  punishment guiding  as  logically  not p e r s o n s .  p.  'presumption  punished  T h i s makes i t a t l e a s t but  1980,  because  'right  Persons  maker, and  cannot  the  i t i s persons  actions.  seems a l m o s t  thus, the  r e s p o n s i b l e agents  punishable,  (Duguid,  affirms,  that  punished.  for their  irresponsible  Barker  stresses  being  persons,  'It  Persons  a decision  acts'  agents.  'that  p. 2 8 0 ) .  argument  his  only  of  of t h i s  accountable  for  responsible  as  from P u n i s h m e n t  the to  Education  such a program. action  persons,  i s no  just  especially  reason  to f o r f e i t  with regard  a l l rights,  ' f o r example,  or  [ t o ] the  121  right  t o be t r e a t e d  (Williams,  1978,  as a person,' p. 1 8 7 ) .  human b e i n g s a s p e r s o n s ' that  t h e y have  even while receive  opportunities  ...if  (Morris,  punished.  so should  a person  Thus  to  .  .  .  every  h i s reputation  (Doyle,  1969, p. 61)  This education  fairly  to  tries  action  fundamental b a s i s  to find  toward of t h i s  fellow  persons improve  remembering  in  society  and  develop  responsible to  available  opportunity  f o r h i s offence,  and t o  i n t h e community...  Obligation support  for prisoners'  man'  (Morin,  t o t h o s e we f e e l  thus  to  education  love,'  1981, p. 2 7 ) . The  do n o t d e s e r v e  not because  right to  brotherly  o b l i g a t i o n i s the ' d e s i r e  t o do good even right  'treats  and w i t h d i g n i t y ,  i n 'a human o b l i g a t i o n t o f r a t e r n i t y ,  'charitable  a  p. 125),  other  and s t a t u s  from F r a t e r n a l  argument  forfeitable'  f o r h i s c o n d u c t , he h a s  make r e p a r a t i o n  Argument  if  is 'sufficiently  restore  4.  'not  prisoners:  right to exercise  to  1970,  education  answer a n d be p u n i s h e d the  is  A j u s t system of punishment  t h e r i g h t t o be t r e a t e d  being  themselves,  which  and t h e w i l l  i t . ' There  is  ' t h e law s a y s s o , b u t  b e c a u s e t h e law o f m o r a l o b l i g a t i o n s a y s s o ' (1981, p. 2 8 ) . I would n o t c o m p l e t e l y argument. attitude guards  d i s c r e d i t such a high-minded  However, i t assumes f a r t o o c o n s i d e r a t e toward p r i s o n e r s  or  indeed  on t h e p a r t ,  for  of the p u b l i c a t l a r g e .  l i n e of  and humane an  example,  of  prison  We must, o f c o u r s e ,  122  appeal  to higher p r i n c i p l e s  accompanied 5.  by  other  Argument  According imprisoned their  citizens  become l e s s  protection How  can  the  not d u t i e s .  be  educated,  possibility,  We  but  might,  avenging  members of  commit  the r i g h t  crime.  be  educated t o be  on  In correlate  chapter  t o be  argued  can  be  on  with  repeat which expect  in  prisoners  rights  have a d u t y i s not  to  this  educated. prisoners  are  also  protection—perhaps  from  from  their  own  can c l a i m  education and  proclivity  education  proclivity.  to society,  of  of p r i s o n e r s to  investigated  that  other c i t i z e n s this  the r i g h t s  prisoners'  done t h r o u g h  such a  its citizens,  citizens—including  bear  i s being  but a l s o  able to contribute  to  can  p r i s o n e r s might  society,  if  citizens  here  require  the grounds t h a t  duty of e d u c a t i n g  be  those  agreement  f o r a change  They  This  earlier,  that  of a r i g h t  s u g g e s t s ways of o v e r c o m i n g proposed  an  i m p l y more a d u t y  t h e n , what  society.  demand t h a t before  of  society  would  however,  of  result  are concerned  that  can  t h e y were  whereby  of  I t c o u l d be but,  t h i s must  of o f f e n c e s .  has  this  members  to  the  right  If society  and  is  than  society,  this  make t h e c h a n g e .  It  likely  repetition  better,  but  Effects  argument, c i t i z e n s  This  with  from  prisoners? for  Social  to t h i s  have  rights,  arguments.  from  offences.  to j u s t i f y  Then the  too,  right  i s required  which  to  duty  to  be  f o r them  i f t h e government has  i t owes t h i s  as  a  a l l its  prisoners.  t h r e e , i t was  with duties.  shown t h a t  rights  A government's duty,  need not  however, t o  always educate  1 23  its  citizens,  with  a  right  educated. a duty, in  r e p r e s e n t an o c c a s i o n o f a d u t y  of  persons  The government  -  and  thus  c a n be s e e n  two  that  in  particular.  t h e CSC r e c o g n i z e s a  controlling  offenders'  and  prisoners  stated  their  chances  For 'duty  t h e Task  Force  to  fairly'  by  of  prisoners,  reformation  system  the e s s e n t i a l  and s o c i a l  (Correctional  provides  grounds  shall  means  lives.  that  can  I t has a l s o  been  provide f o r treatment  a i m o f which  6.  for prisoners,  'The long-term society  provision benefits' (Duguid  does  benef i t :  from  Paper  from  their  1986, p. 13)  corrections,  i n a p p r o p r i a t e programs  i t  right  to  such  t o demand i t .  to the C o l l e c t i v e  post-secondary  Hoekama,  Two,  in  prisoners'  of such programs  and  result  Benefits of  be  as t h e o b j e c t s o f these aims,  of these aims  It i s , therefore,  Argument  shall  rehabilitation...  Law Review W o r k i n g  materialization  as e d u c a t i o n .  crime  '  (1984, p . 1 9 ) . I t  and  t h e s e do r e p r e s e n t government a m b i t i o n s  claim  act  that:  ...The p e n i t e n t i a r y  If  useful  mentioned  example,  ' h e l p i n g them'  of l i v i n g  - t o be so  stipulations  s e e s h e l p i n g p r i s o n e r s a s d e v e l o p i n g ways enhance  correlating  as b e i n g c o g n i z a n t o f s u c h  as d e p i c t e d i n v a r i o u s o f f i c i a l  chapter  states  might  education looks to the  f o r both  the  1985, p. 2 0 6 ) .  educational  prisoner  and  I f a decrease i n  programs,  society  will  124  ...providing  .  to p r i s o n e r s  i s a s much  general  .  .  argument  as of the p r i s o n e r s . . .  1985, p . 205) echoes the U t i l i t a r i a n  argument  b e n e f i t s which e d u c a t i o n  can b r i n g  a r e extended  society.  the  been  an  opportunities  i n the i n t e r e s t s of the  Canadian p o p u l a t i o n  ( D u g u i d and Hoekama, Such  educational  Evidence  presented. at  the  University  assert  'overstated'  ...only  University  that  educational  prisoners that  Victoria  point  wrongdoer  return  education  Simon  Fraser  of education  cannot  become  will  criminals  and c i t i z e n s . . .  i n s u c h a way t h a t  If education  who  already  1985, p . 1 3 3 ) :  punishment  can  then,  t o become r e s p o n s i b l e  prisoners  men  to  1985, p . 134)  i s that  incarceration,  and  benefits'  institutions  t o s o c i e t y as b e t t e r  (1969, p . 2 9 9 ) . of  of  has  penitentiary  when c o r r e c t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s  Gahringer's  part  for prisoners  the  'the s o c i a l  ( D u g u i d and Hoekama,  individual  with  ( D u g u i d and Hoekama,  enlightened return  benefits  Students  programs  be  of  to prisoners  i n that  to  society  become  both  should  a  the  address  too can b e n e f i t  fully goals  the  functioning of  educating  p e r s o n s , and o f e n s u r i n g  society  society  can  are  educated,  be  achieved. 7. The being  Argument previous  from  Equality  arguments  claimed  that  a p e r s o n , o r l o s e one's w o r t h a s a human  one does n o t c e a s e being  because  of  1 25  a  crime  or  offence  against  the r e s t of s o c i e t y .  p e r s o n s , and members of t h e m o r a l community, a p a r t of  r i g h t s necessary  continue that  to receive  treatment This  In  might  to claim  chapter  four,  persons  treatment  of  of i n t r i n s i c  with  grounds  to protect  possessing way  equality  of  of  w o r t h and d i g n i t y w h i c h  could  for  claiming  a n d enhance  t h e same k i n d s o f  this  r i g h t s t o be t r e a t e d  this  t o be u s e d whenever  over a n o t h e r .  advance'  which  good o r bad r e a s o n s principles decisions situation unless  why  this  with  there  must h o l d  kind  of equal  as  that  general  situations ought  arise.  This  there  whatever  are  'principles in  we make.  what a r e  These  general  consistency  in  i s being  decided  exactly  differences  means  t o c h o o s e a c e r t a i n way o f  ensure  f o r another  treatment  t o determine c e r t a i n  us ' d i s t i n g u i s h i n g e n e r a l '  and  are relevant  respect,  Peters  f o r whatever c h o i c e  we make, m a i n l y X  we  help  determine  worth.  (1966).  T h i s means t h a t  will  intrinsic  worth'and d i g n i t y .  justifying  reasons  ways. There  reasoning  acting  consideration  (1973) n o t i o n .  s u g g e s t s we u s e p r a c t i c a l  for  allows  for in various  i s s u g g e s t e d by P e t e r s  looking  rights  argument, t h e n ,  between and among p e r s o n s  principles  to  persons.  Everyone e l s e can c l a i m  Another  This  we e n c o u n t e r e d V l a s t o s '  necessary  creatures  have.  o f e q u a l i t y has been a r g u e d  i s a common p l a t f o r m provide  t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f p u n i s h m e n t , must  t h e same k i n d  as other  claim  from t h e l o s s  t h e same r i g h t s and o p p o r t u n i t i e s  non-prisoners  prisoners and  t o meet  P r i s o n e r s as  whatever in  a  s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n Y,  i n s i t u a t i o n Y:  1 26  ...If hold  reasons hold i n another  advanced which  i n one s i t u a t i o n t h e n  unless  further  they  r e a s o n s c a n be  indicate a relevant  reason...  (1966, p . 51) This  f o r Peters  justice.'  It  'distinctions and  that  they  ensure  that  those  already  and  his  notion  not  relevant  or  those  a r e made from t h i s  'condemns c r i t e r i a to  others, who  especially  are l i k e l y  vantage point  of  t o be  fairness  h i g h l i g h t s the importance of the p r i n c i p l e of e q u a l i t y  prisoners.  They a r e i n t h a t  precarious  done some harm t o s o c i e t y , a n d s o c i e t y m i g h t disadvantaged. disadvantages are  a r e no r e l e v a n t  I t supplies  concerning  or  differences  principle  1966, p . 5 3 ) .  disadvantaged,  fairness  equality—that  i f there  This  and a c t i o n s  of  are  made  p. 51).  (Peters,  decisions  be  of  justice. This  for  should  treated,  principle  be made i f t h e r e  (1966,  arbitrariness'  unfairly  underpins  should  differences'  i s the 'formal  still  persons. reason  principle  imposed upon them.  persons,  with  the  for deprivation  especially  right  like  of that  of the s o r t that  case  opportunities  to  maintains  right  certain of  education;  to  to  limits that  rights,  is but  opportunities  see  them  upon  the  prisoners  be t r e a t e d  incarceration  can b e n e f i t  i s strengthened  like  I t r e m i n d s us  I t i s acknowledged t h a t  example, a  The  This  p o s i t i o n of having  a  f a i r l y as relevant  not o f ,  to  education,  them.  i f members o f s o c i e t y a l r e a d y then p r i s o n e r s ,  a l s o have s i m i l a r o p p o r t u n i t i e s ,  for  especially  as persons, in  the  have should  light  of  1 27  Peters' result  idea  p.  only  relevant  in d i f f e r e n t treatment.  'normal an  that  r i g h t s of  education 206).  'given  a citizen'  of  do  (Duguid  two  affirmed  that  ( D u g u i d and  that  prisoners  are  population.  This  there  is  given  this  s u c h as  no  access  r i g h t , then,  Even  incarcerated  so  that  despite  the  may  be,  t h e y can  not  that  human  still  the  m o r a l community who  be  shown  ways of  of  beings  have d e v i a t e d  returning,  to  instead  of  to  be  programs  prisoners'  moral  Morally the  state.  ought  because  claim  are  214).  their  the  ought  right,  r e m a i n members of  'extreme v a r i a b i l i t y '  of  rest  better  position  (1977, p.  of  getting.  have t h i s a  This  right  equality  claim  seem t o be  is  they  the  was  206).  same  Prisoners  in  t o a m o r a l community  as  this.  them  belonging  the  for  puts  philosophy  p.  of  society  Melden's  1985,  to  1985,  in prison  principle  non-prisoners did state  persons  education  reason  members of  if  to  the  Hoekama,  education  Hoekama,  that  r i g h t of a c c e s s  and  receiving  v i o l a t e s the  relevant  other  not  legitimately  suggested  the  quality'  priority'  of  one  'include  a low  opportunity  as  Chapter  good  Chapter  implies  d i f f e r e n c e s can  agents flawed  community, Members  t o have the  being  it.  dropped  of  right for  to  their  deviat ion. Prisoners, the  community.  therefore, This  is  need o p p o r t u n i t i e s an  officially  incarceration.  I t a l s o adheres to  the  and  The  Law  justice.  q u o t e s the 'Justice  1977 for  Correctional  Parliamentary inmates  is  a  returning  proclaimed  maintenance  to  function of  right'  as  of  fairness  Review W o r k i n g P a p e r  Sub-Commitee personal  of  stating (1986, p.  One that  25).  1 28  Hervieux-Payette also  ...Educational based o n l y criminal,  states:  opportunity  in prison  on s o c i e t y ' s d e s i r e but a l s o  on a s o c i a l  educational  i s not  t o reform the committment t o  fairness i n a just  society...  (1985, p . 187) CONCLUSION TO THE CHAPTER It  i s t h e Argument  thesis.  It  example,  forges  from  prisoners  should  which and  the  society.  in  persons  of P e r s o n s , "  education  which o t h e r  in  this  Contract  a n d making d e c i s i o n s is  not  considered  of a r i g h t to  of  which a  education.  to  the  the  i t was a r g u e d  that  from  right  persons apparently Social  are interested are  relevant  those  the i n s t i t u t i o n ,  r e t a i n t h e same  Rawls'  For  and  themselves,  therefore,  involved  Incarceration,"  o f any r i g h t s a p a r t  to protect  They s h o u l d ,  central  between a r g u m e n t s .  Punishment  interpretation  punishment  is  from  Scharf's  principles  prisoners  of the l i n k s  n o t be d e p r i v e d  to  which  "Argument  must be s u s p e n d e d  opportunity Even  many  i n both the  "Argument  from E q u a l i t y  fair factor  of  have.  Contract, i n choosing  to  a l l , and  in depriving  1 29  Two main The  first  right It  arguments  is  moral  t o be t r e a t e d  is  being  CONCLUSION  have  been made  i n theme.  in  Such a r i g h t  dissertation.  are persons with the  and r e s p e c t  of e v e r y human b e i n g  thing.'  this  Prisoners  with the d i g n i t y  'the r i g h t  and n o t  VI .  due  t o be t r e a t e d  t o be t r e a t e d  persons. a s a human  as  a  person  is:  ...a  f u n d a m e n t a l human r i g h t  human b e i n g s by v i r t u e It  i s also  .  right  a criminal,  does  He c a n n o t be c a s t  (MacDonald,  1970, p . 57)  rights  .  right...  t h o u g h he h a s l o s t  worthless.  Such a r i g h t  of  .  human.  because:  and may d e s e r v e p u n i s h m e n t ,  punishment.  being  to a l l  1970, p . 51)  Prisoners possess t h i s  ...Even  of t h e i r  an i n a l i e n a b l e  (MacDonald,  belonging  enables prisoners  This  means  that  merit  n o t become  out of humanity...  to claim  the r i g h t  prisoners are entitled  w h i c h o t h e r p e r s o n s have w h i c h need n o t be  the  conditions  of punishment  punishment  of imprisonment  Law Review  Working  underlies  lost  and i n c a r c e r a t i o n .  i s the l o s s  of l i b e r t y '  Paper One, 1986, p . 1 6 ) .  fair  to claim because 'The r e a l  (Correctional  T h i s moral  t h e next statement of t h e d i s s e r t a t i o n ,  to a  that  premise the r i g h t  130  to  education  incarceration, The  is  a  and  that t h i s  grounds  right  for  t h a t p r i s o n e r s ought right  this  ought  t o be  statement  are  consequences  of b e i n g  a b l e t o c l a i m such  able  example,  because c e r t a i n  to.  become  For  associated with  education,  consequences r e s u l t i n g  from  such  among t h e s e  an  notions.  initiator  relates  Primary  of change and  education  desirable  state  worthwhile  and  are a broadening o u r s e l v e s and mental  and  to guide  our  within are  us  any  different  of  involvement 'travelling'  being  notions  have  some  persons.  positive  (1965,  a deeper  p.  these  insight  sound and  in  which  90),  i.e.,  finds  have  i s somewhat  o t h e r more s o c i a l l y  into  persons  program.  its  understanding  To  of  t o use  our these  can  I t thus  be  fostered  finds  i t s home  education  programs  t o t h e many v a r i e d  abilities  home  changes  be  1967,  where  educated p.8).  indicated faulty—at  inferred and  in  cater  in  d e s i r a b l e changes  ability  where many k i n d s of  (Peters,  t h e r e f o r e be  the  a  rational decisions.  development  required.  i n crime  and  as  R.S.Peters  processes  Some of  faculties,  to  the  not  r e l a t i o n s h i p with others, a sharpening  It also  view'  and  s h o u l d be  in  of  develops'  of o u t l o o k ,  necessary  not  a right,  from  i s the n o t i o n of e d u c a t i o n  sort  k i n d of e d u c a t i o n  desirable—if  there  legal.  derived  beneficial  development  v a l u a b l e ways.  a prison context  also  can  mind  i n t o making  prisoners.  It  of  made  during  e n f o r c i n g programs which i n c o r p o r a t e  'some  intellectual  These s o r t s through  to  t o have  such i s to  Prisoners  that t h e i r least  'travel  as  with  current society  are  with  a  their  mode  of  views i t .  t h a t p r i s o n e r s r e q u i r e t o be  m o r a l l y a c c e p t a b l e modes o f  of  shown  'travelling'  131  which l e a d  them away from the  A l e g a l r i g h t to education  desirable from  k i n d s of  in a prison  context.  opportunities,  responsible  important by  correctional  (Education The  and  education  of  also  system  official  to  seen At of  p.  able as  the  to claim  some seeming  instability  i n the  provision  other  some  prisoners  themselves geared  to achieve  whether  the  penal  could  said  to  be  might  be  as  two), and  be,  and  s y s t e m , as  relatively  less  that  'an  stable  to  penitentiary appears to of  however,  be the  suggests  appropriateness  of  m a i n l y , whether a l l from  programs  whether p r o g r a m s  are  for  and  prisoners,  a whole as  right  review  to b e n e f i t  these b e n e f i t s  education  and  established  legal  A  r a i s e d are  receiving opportunities  benefit  orientation'  b e n e f i t t i n g the  (chapter  as  a  moment, e d u c a t i o n  be  to  deemed  8).  system  are  been  educational  education  prisoners  able  expressed  incarceration.  Q u e s t i o n s w h i c h can  present  i n t o more m o r a l  been  penitentiary  programs.  are  those  for such persons are  'an  1985,  to  development  p r o g r a m s ' has  be  being  itself.  stipulation  and  If p r i s o n e r s  society,  CSC,  be  for prisoners  designed  C o n f i d e n c e has  research  Training,  can  secure  changes  successful  c o n s e q u e n c e s of  education  an  crimes.  component  could  prison.  t h e i r development  persons benefits  t o commit  to  deliberatedly  f o r the  such  likely  education  programs  opportunities  road  that  for  prisoners,  of  non-prison  soc i e t y . Chapter not  all  two  i n p a r t i c u l a r showed g r o u n d s  penitentiaries  p r o g r a m s , and  that  the  could  education  boast  for  the  satisfactory  s y s t e m as  view  that  education  a whole s t i l l  had  its  1 32  problems. whether  Indeed,  official  educators, quality,'  Morin  and  Cosman t h i n k t h a t most s t u d i e s ,  r e p o r t s or i n f o r m a l  would  testify  accounts  by  professional  t h a t programs a r e 'mostly  of  inferior  manifested i n :  m e d i o c r e and p o o r l y expectations, curricula,  trained  s t a f f , low  poor e d u c a t i o n a l achievement,  watered-down  weak s u p e r v i s i o n , l a c k o f e d u c a t i o n a l  counselling,  .  .  .  inadequate  resources...  (1984, p . 12) Chapter rationale,  two a l s o i n d i c a t e d  as  reflected  incarceration, well.  The p o s i t i o n  example, the  could  i s said  moment,  education  i s being  a problem  even  policies  and  goals  f o r the education  penitentiary  confused'  i n d i r e c t i o n and  (Morin,  of  system as  education,  for  1981, p. 1 7 1 ) . A t  u n c e r t a i n t y about  whether a n d how  used:  t o which e d u c a t i o n  been u t i l i z e d approach  and t r a i n i n g  as a s y s t e m a t i c ,  universally  t o inmate b e h a v i o u r a l  change  open t o c o n j e c t u r e . . .  (Dennison,  1979, p . 4)  How  legal  can a  situation? claim  is  inconstancy  changing  o f t h e CSC on  there  accepted is  be  t o be v e r y  ...The e x t e n t has  in  how  such  What a right  right  would  be  f o r the  to the  education  ameliorate  consequences of being  penitentiary  education  such  a  able to  system?  A  1 33  right  to  education  right-holders education  ensures  which  priorities.  authorities  and  if  persons  t o ensure  for  so  geared  even  possible  t h a t , as cautioned  is  classroom be  a  and  intellectual  of  attention  'the  they  other  label  or  provided.  is implicit  c a n o n l y be  are  OISE  realized At  available,  Review  everything  The  within the  i t s realization.  The c o n c e r n  n o t be a b l e  the it  (1978,  is  p.44),  which occurs  in a  has  that  whether training  s o r t s of 'education'  already  to affect  been  broader  the reasoning  of p r i s o n e r s , which a r e prime t a r g e t s  1981, p . 1 4 3 ) .  be p a i d t h e f a c t  education  assurance  i f p r o g r a m s do n o t e n c a p s u l a t e  will  abilities  One c o u l d q u e r y really  i s being  i n genuine e d u c a t i o n a l programs.  (Duguid,  attention  which  by t h e  c h a r a c t e r of the education  point'  measure up t o some  T h e r e has t o be some  programs  termed as e d u c a t i o n .  goals,  upon  Y e t n o t e v e r y t h i n g w h i c h does o c c u r c a n  previously that  educational  i t would become incumbent  toward  to  as e d u c a t i o n .  actually  expressed  tendency  in social and  a potential  "education"  of  to  benefits  development  But s u c h  moment,  there  regardless  i t i s education  of e d u c a t i o n .  if  is.  and  opportunities  the changes  t h a t p r o g r a m s do i n d e e d  change  programs a r e  claim  and  in society.  that  of what e d u c a t i o n  potential  right  suggested  that  can  w o r t h w h i l e no m a t t e r  as other  also  guarantee  concept  they  They c l a i m t h i s  is  standards  that  is  advantages—just It  f o r p r i s o n e r s i n themselves as persons  With p r i s o n e r s ,  they  receive  Thus,  i t i s very  i t i s education present  is  programs might  central  important  that  provided.  education  programs.  the  programs  are  T r a i n i n g programs, or be v a l u a b l e  in  their  1 34  own or  ways, but  they mainly  aim  to prepare persons  t o e q u i p them w i t h a g i v e n s k i l l .  incorporate training  broader  educational  programs, because  t h e y do  f o r employment,  I f t h e y do  goals, not  not c o n s c i o u s l y  they  will  attempt  to  remain  do  as  anything  else. If  the  underlying rationale  away o f p e r s o n s equipped right  from c r i m e , and  to avoid c r i m i n a l  to education  education  which  is a is  of c o r r e c t i o n s  the development  actions,  possible  being  time.  claim  A legal  the  kind  right  way  to  provided,  example, p r o g r a m s g e a r e d law-abiding  ensure  and  this  personnel/public of  no  not as  grateful. though and  that just  legal it  is  training  of s o m e t h i n g  into  to  pass  prisoners  more  prisoners  moral  their  They  to  and  right,  and  Such a p o s i t i o n and  would  if  give  the  service  the s e r v i c e  i s demeaning  offensive  to  be  t o be  them  grounds  of  services. or  privilege, content who  still  allowed  e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m s as t h e i r  the  ceased,  as a  are  or world  to p r i s o n e r s ,  to society,  ought  The  obtaining  t h u s were e x p e c t e d  They t h u s  of proper  rights  concerned  standards  provided.  without  were o b t a i n i n g  and  about  being  grounds f o r complaint  right-holders.  This  them  complain  education  wrong-doers  enforcement  not  p i c t u r e d people  deteriorated. and  a  i s a p p r o p r i a t e f o r them, f o r  to develop  right,  could  the  Nowheresville They had  not  more  persons.  Without  quality  of p e r s o n s  t o e d u c a t i o n would e n a b l e  of e d u c a t i o n which  turning  being able to c l a i m  p r o g r a m s , or w o r s e , a p e r f u n c t o r y p r o v i s i o n the  i s the  to  and even  persons claim  right.  for challenging  decisions  1 35  which a r e d e t r i m e n t a l as  perhaps,  programs.  decisions This  what t h e y  to the penitentiary  do  especially  would  to i n turn  f o r they  those  terminate  to  violate  answer  seek  they  are providing,  feels the  two,  unfairly law  grounds f o r such a seeking  judicial  prisoners  intervention  A  provided  Working  in  prisoners, The  be a b l e  any  t o seek In  were s a i d t o have  inmate  is  she a l l e g e s  the  Charter  and  presently that  women  opportunities  o f R i g h t s a n d Freedoms  attributed  to  the  system  also  help  i f e v e r y o n e was a b l e provision  that there  sphere will  of proper of  a whole i s i t s  to claim  and  d i s s e r t a t i o n h a s been f o u n d e d  the  Review  the status  system  as  a  steady, s a t i s f a c t o r y ,  education  corrections  Law  education  stabilize  be i n t e g r a t i o n  as  (Correctional  P a p e r One, 1986, p . 6 ) . A c c o r d i n g  consistent  least  also  t h e same s e r v i c e s  i t s ' s t r u c t u r a l complexity'  for  programs.  i s seen a s a v i o l a t i o n o f t h e e q u a l i t y  by  a l e g a l r i g h t might  whole,  be a b l e t o  differentiation.  woman  because  of the  18, 1987, p . A 7 ) .  feature  vastness,  This  will  prisoners  A  will  They  by a l l i n m a t e s ,  unfair  women  complaint.  male p r i s o n e r s .  (Van.Sun, A p r .  be c l a i m a b l e  regarding  a r e not r e c e i v i n g  guarantees  and  f o r now p r i s o n e r s  treated  f o r example,  actions,  the standards  such a r i g h t w i l l  chapter  of  about  Because  answers from  as  for their  f o r i n a d e q u a t e and u n s a t i s f a c t o r y  who  education  makers more wary o f  redress  inmate  such  the r i g h t to education.  w o u l d a l s o have t o be more v i g i l a n t programs  system,  worthwhile  make d e c i s i o n  have  which  education  programs, then, aimed  to  at  'correct'  consistency.  upon t h e m o r a l p r i n c i p l e s  1 36  of  justice,  fairness,  occasions,  these  enforcement  and a c t i o n .  the is  represents and  respect  principles  law i s r e q u i r e d postulated  and  the  with  other  On  potent  many  agents of  adherence to these p r i n c i p l e s . of  one o f t h e s e o c c a s i o n s .  If  provision  are s u f f i c i e n t l y  situation  members o f s o c i e t y d e s p i t e  society.  persons.  Sometimes, however, t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f  to i n s t i l  that  for  persons  of e d u c a t i o n a l  penitentiary  Prisoners  their are  having  opportunities,  education  are s t i l l  persons  t o be i s o l a t e d  enjoying  It  steady  from  and s t a b l e  i t would be i n c o n s i s t e n t  t h e above m e n t i o n e d p r i n c i p l e s t o d e p r i v e  prisoners  of such  opportunit i e s . The the  Canadian C r i m i n o l o g i c a l J u s t i c e A s s o c i a t i o n  goal  o f i t s Manual o f S t a n d a r d s  have a c c e s s t o a c a d e m i c those  in  necessity  the that  and  which  do r e t a i n  i s often  true,'  denied.  this access As M i l l e r but  that  prisoners  equivalent  It  be l e g a l l y  a l l rights,  to  i s therefore enforceable, to  sees  a so  education--  i t , prisoners  'in practice,  the  f o r example:  . . . C o u r t s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s incarceration  that  programs  p. 59).  c a n be g u a r a n t e e d  some a r e b e i n g  principle'  (1985,  the r i g h t t o education  a l l prisoners  reverse  and v o c a t i o n a l  community'  that  'in  i s t o 'ensure  states  as a f o r f e i t u r e  view of  criminal educational  rights... (1978, p. 230) Such prisoners,  a  situation  their  lack  is  compounded  by  the  o f a d e f e n s e mechanism, t o  inability improve  of  their  1 37  educational  opportunities.  insufficient, to  ensure  and  the  inmates which  ...A  prisoner  just  righ  1981,  p.  therefore  to  be  so--if  o t h e r members of  of  law  due  conviction  no  obtain  in a  of  society an  is a  a chance to 1965,  a a  for  then,  education  to  society:  .  serious person's  in s o c i a l  services...  p.  are  of  78)  incarceration.  it  everyone  the  behooves  indeed  is  Even more protection society  should  i t f o r a l l he  legal  available, i f  society,  to c l a i m  a  prisoners:  rattle, shake  or  able  education, for  prisoners  i f resources are  institution  similar right  (Frankena,  necessary,  .  g r o u n d s t o deny  harm t h e  education  given  his  a b e n e f i c i a l component  to  r e s t of  expect  especially  found  be  t o be  seems  appear  231)  does not  ...If  the  educational  education,  acknowledge a  of  principles  opportunity  relative equality  education  the  that  an  reasonable diminish  including  There are  of  reasonably  in that  to expect  (Scharf,  to  can  cannot  goods,  to  education  society  felony  intervention  provision  i s equal  a quality  right  judicial  Moral  i s worth...  to  138  BIBLIOGRAPHY A r n o l d , C h r i s t o p h e r , ' A n a l y s e s o f R i g h t s , ' Eugene Kamenka a n d A l i c e E r h - S o o n T a y ( e d s . ) , Human R i g h t s , London, Edward A r n o l d , 1978, p . 74-86. A y e r s , J . D., ' E v a l u a t i o n of Academic E d u c a t i o n Canadian C o r r e c t i o n s I n s t i t u t i o n s , ' Report C o r r e c t i o n s S e r v i c e , November 1974.  Programs i n t o the Canadian  , 'A M o d e l f o r P r i s o n E d u c a t i o n Programs and G u i d e l i n e s f o r T h e i r O p e r a t i o n , ' J o u r n a l of C o r r e c t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n , 1979, v . 30, p. 3-7. , ' E d u c a t i o n i n P r i s o n s : A D e v e l o p m e n t a l and C u l t u r a l P e r s p e c t i v e , ' Canadian J o u r n a l of Education, v. 6:2, 1981. , D u g u i d , S t e p h e n , Montague, C a t h e r i n e , and Wolowydnik, S o n i a , ' E f f e c t s o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f V i c t o r i a Program: A P o s t - R e l e a s e Study,' Report t o the S o l i c i t o r G e n e r a l , 1980. Bandman, B., ' I s t h e r e a R i g h t t o E d u c a t i o n ? , ' E d u c a t i o n , 1977, p . 287-97.  Philosophy  of  B a r n h a r d t , J . E . , 'Human R i g h t s a s A b s o l u t e C l a i m s and Reasonable E x p e c t a t i o n s , ' American P h i l o s o p h i c a l Q u a r t e r l y , v. 6, 4, O c t o b e r 1969, p . 335-39. B a r k e r , E r n e s t , P r i n c i p l e s o f S o c i a l and P o l i t i c a l London, O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1965.  Theory,  B a x e n d a l e , A.S., " E d u c a t i o n S e r v i c e s i n t h e Regimes of P r i s o n e r s , " Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l S e m i n a r on Comparative A s p e c t s of C u s t o d i a l E d u c a t i o n and V o c a t i o n a l P r e p a r a t i o n , L a n c a s h i r e C o l l e g e , C h o r l e y , E n g l a n d , J u n e 813, 1980. B e l s t e a d , L o r d , ' P o s i t i v e E d u c a t i o n i n a P e n a l C o n t e x t , ' Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l Seminar on C o m p a r a t i v e A s p e c t s o f C u s t o d i a l and V o c a t i o n a l P r e p a r a t i o n , L a n c a s h i r e C o l l e g e , C h o r l e y , E n g l a n d , June 8-13 1980, p . 65-76. Benn, S. I . , 'Human R i g h t s — f o r Whom a n d f o r What?' Eugene Kamenka and A l i c e E r h - S o o n T a y , Human R i g h t s , London, Edward A r n o l d , 1978, p. 59-73. , ' E g a l i t a r i a n i s m and t h e E q u a l C o n s i d e r a t i o n o f I n t e r e s t s , ' Hugh A. Bedau ( e d . ) , J u s t i c e and E q u a l i t y , New J e r s e y , E n g l e w o o d C l i f f s , P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1971, p. 152-67. , a n d R. S. P e t e r s ,  Social  Principles  and the  139  Democratic  State,  London, A l l e n and Unwin, L t d . , 1959.  B l a c k s t o n e , B., ' E q u a l i t y 1968, p. 616-39. .  a n d Human R i g h t s , '  M o n i s t , v . 52, 4,  B r i t i s h Columbia, M i n i s t r y of t h e A t t o r n e y - G e n e r a l , R e p o r t , A p r i l 1981 t o M a r c h 1982. B r i t i s h Columbia C i v i l L i b e r t i e s A s s o c i a t i o n , t h e R i g h t s o f P r i s o n e r s , J u n e 1981.  Annual  P o l i c y Paper on  Brumbaugh, R o b e r t S. a n d N a t h a n i e l M. Lawrence, Philosophers on E d u c a t i o n : S i x E s s a y s On The F o u n d a t i o n s o f W e s t e r n T h o u g h t , B o s t o n , Houghton M i f f l i n Co., 1963. Canadian C r i m i n a l 1985. Charter of  Justice Association,  Manual o f S t a n d a r d s ,  o f R i g h t s a n d Freedoms, A G u i d e F o r C a n a d i a n s , S u p p l y and S e r v i c e s , Canada, 1984.  Correctional 1987.  Education  Association  Minister  Conference, Van., February  C o r r e c t i o n a l Law Review, A Framework f o r The C o r r e c t i o n a l Law R e v i e w , C o r r e c t i o n a l Law Review W o r k i n g P a p e r One and Two, J u n e 1986. Correctional Service J u n e 1980.  o f Canada, E d u c a t i o n  and T r a i n i n g  Division,  , F i r s t R e p o r t o f t h e Task on t h e M i s s i o n a n d O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Development o f C o r r e c t i o n s S e r v i c e o f Canada, November 1984. Education  Force  , C o m m i s s i o n e r ' s D i r e c t i v e on t h e o f O f f e n d e r s , 1987.  Cosman, J . W. , ' P e n i t e n t i a r y E d u c a t i o n i n Canada,' L u c i e n M o r i n ( e d . ) , On P r i s o n E d u c a t i o n , C o r r e c t i o n a l S e r v i c e o f Canada, 1981, p. 34-42. , ' E d u c a t i o n and C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e : S h o u l d P r i s o n s a F e d e r a l or a P r o v i n c i a l R e s p o n s i b i l i t y ? ' U n p u b l i s h e d P a p e r , 1985.  be  C r a n s t o n , M a u r i c e , 'Human R i g h t s , R e a l and S u p p o s e d , ' D. D. R a p h a e l ( e d . ) , P o l i t i c a l T h e o r y a n d t h e R i g h t s o f Man , B l o o m i n g t o n a n d London, I n d i a n a U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1967, p. 43-53. Crittenden, Brian, L t d . , 1973.  Education  and S o c i a l  Ideals,  Longman  Canada  1 40  D a n i e l s , L. B., 'Comments on R i g h t s and R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , ' Task F o r c e on A u t h o r i t y and R e s p o n s i b i l i t y , B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a T e a c h e r s F e d e r a t i o n , 1977. D e n n e t t , D a n i e l , ' C o n d i t i o n s o f P e r s o n h o o d , ' A m e l i e D. R o r t y ( e d . ) , I d e n t i t i e s of P e r s o n s , Los A n g e l e s , U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a P r e s s , 1976, p . 175-96. D e n n i s o n , J o h n D., ' P e n i t e n t i a r y E d u c a t i o n U n p u b l i s h e d p a p e r , 1979.  i n Canada,'  , 'Prison Education i n a P o s i t i v e Context,' Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l Seminar on C o m p a r a t i v e A s p e c t s o f C u s t o d i a l E d u c a t i o n and V o c a t i o n a l P r e p a r a t i o n , L a n c a s h i r e C o l l e g e , C h o r l e y , E n g l a n d , June 8-13 1980, p. 98-107. Downie, R. S., and E . T e l f e r , R e s p e c t f o r P e r s o n s , George A l l e n and Unwin L t d . , 1970.  London,  D o y l e , J . F., ' J u s t i c e and L e g a l P u n i s h m e n t , ' i n H. B. A c t o n , The P h i l o s o p h y o f P u n i s h m e n t , London, M a c M i l l a n , S t . M a r t i n ' s P r e s s , 1969, p . 159-71. D u g u i d , S t e p h e n , 'From P r i s o n e r t o C i t i z e n : T h e o r y and P r a c t i c e of M o r a l E d u c a t i o n i n t h e P r i s o n , ' Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o n f e r e n c e on C o m p a r a t i v e A s p e c t s o f C u s t o d i a l E d u c a t i o n and V o c a t i o n a l P r e p a r a t i o n , Lancashire C o l l e g e , C h o r l e y , E n g l a n d , J u n e 8-13 1980. , ' P r i s o n E d u c a t i o n and C r i m i n a l C h o i c e : The C o n t e x t o f D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g , ' L u c i e n M o r i n ( e d . ) , On P r i s o n E d u c a t i o n , O t t a w a , M i n i s t e r o f S u p p l y and S e r v i c e s , 1981, p. 134-57. , ' R e h a b i l i t a t i o n through Education,' Lucien M o r i n ( e d . ) , On P r i s o n E d u c a t i o n , O t t a w a , M i n i s t e r of S u p p l y and S e r v i c e s , 1981, p . 43-54. Prison,  , and H. Hoekama ( e d s . ) , U n i v e r s i t y E d u c a t i o n Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y , 1985.  E d u c a t i o n and T r a i n i n g C o r r e c t i o n a l S e r v i c e , C a l e n d a r , C o r r e c t i o n s S e r v i c e o f Canada, 1982-83.  of  in  Studies  , E d u c a t i o n and T r a i n i n g i n t h e C o r r e c t i o n a l S e r v i c e o f Canada, P r o g r a m Review, R a t i o n a l e and F u t u r e D i r e c t i o n , J u l y 1985. E i s e n b e r g , J o h n , 'The N a t u r e o f Law and i t s I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r E d u c a t i o n , ' U n p u b l i s h e d p a p e r , 1982. E k s t e d t , J . W. and C T . G r i f f i t h s , C o r r e c t i o n s i n Canada: P o l i c y a n d P r a c t i c e , T o r o n t o , B u t t e r w o r t h s , 1984.  141  E w i n g , A. C , The Kegan P a u l ,  M o r a l i t y of 1929.  P u n i s h m e n t , London, R o u t l e d g e  and  F e i n b e r g , J . , 'The N a t u r e and V a l u e o f R i g h t s , ' D a v i d L y o n s ( e d . ) , R i g h t s , B e l m o n t , C a l i f o r n i a , Wadsworth P u b l i s h i n g Company, I n c . , 1979, p . 78-91. F l a t h m a n , R i c h a r d E., The P r a c t i c e o f R i g h t s , Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1976. Fox,  Cambridge,  T.A., " J u s t i f y i n g E d u c a t i o n as a Form of R e h a b i l i t a t i o n i n P r i s o n s , " J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and F o u n d a t i o n s , v . 1 , no.1, 1968, p. 49-55.  F r a n k e n a , W i l l i a m K., T h r e e H i s t o r i c a l P h i l o s o p h i e s of , Chicago, S c o t t . Foresman & Co., 1965.  Education  G a h r i n g e r , H., 'Punishment and R e s p o n s i b i l i t y , ' J o u r n a l P h i l o s o p h y , L X V I , v. 10, May 1969, p. 291-300. Gert,  Bernard,  The  Moral Rules,  New  Y o r k , H a r p e r and  of  Row,  1970.  G o f f m a n , E r v i n g , A s y l u m s : E s s a y s on t h e S o c i a l S i t u a t i o n s of M e n t a l P a t i e n t s and O t h e r I n m a t e s , P e n g u i n Books, Harmondsworth, E n g l a n d , 1961. Goldman, A l a n , 'The P a r a d o x of P u n i s h m e n t , ' P h i l o s o p h y P u b l i c A f f a i r s , 1979, p. 42-58. Hart,  and  H. L. A., 'Are T h e r e Any N a t u r a l R i g h t s ? ' D a v i d L y o n s , R i g h t s , B e l m o n t , C a l i f o r n i a , Wadsworth Pub.Co., I n c . , 1979, p. 14-25.  H e r v i e u x - P a y e t t e , C e l i n e , 'Opening Remarks,' P a p e r s P r e s e n t e d a t t h e Symposium on P r i s o n E d u c a t i o n , T r o i s R i v i e r e s , Quebec, Canada, J u l y 9 1981, p. 5-13. H i r s t , P. H., ' L i b e r a l E d u c a t i o n and t h e N a t u r e of James F. D o y l e ( e d . ) , E d u c a t i o n a l J u d g e m e n t s , R o u t l e d g e and Kegan P a u l , 1973, p. 30-53. , and R. S. P e t e r s , The L o g i c R o u t l e d g e and Kegan P a u l , 1970. H o h f e l d , Wesley, Fundamental L e g a l U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1919.  Knowledge,' London,  of E d u c a t i o n ,  Conceptions,  New  London,  Haven,  Hook, S i d n e y , P h i l o s o p h y and P u b l i c P o l i c y , C a r b o n d a l e E d w a r d s v i l i e , S o u t h e r n I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y , 1980.  Yale  and  Hudson, J o e , ' P r i s o n Programming and P r o g r a m E v a l u a t i o n : T r e n d s , I s s u e s , O b s e r v a t i o n s , ' P r o c e e d i n g s of t h e N a t i o n a l C o n f e r e n c e on P r i s o n E d u c a t i o n , V i c t o r i a , B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a ,  1 42  Canada, O c t o b e r  13-15 1981, p. 155-76.  Imber, M i c h a e l , and J . Namenson, ' I s t h e r e a R i g h t t o E d u c a t i o n i n A m e r i c a ? , ' E d u c a t i o n a l T h e o r y , v . 33, 3-4, 1983, p . 97111. I n t e r n a t i o n a l Covenant on E c o n o m i c , S o c i a l R e p o r t o f Canada, F e b r u a r y 1985.  and C u l t u r a l  Rights,  J o b s o n , K. B., 'The Inmate C i t i z e n , ' I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l o f O f f e n d e r T h e r a p y and C o m p a r a t i v e C r i m i n o l o g y , v . 2, 2, 1978, p . 164-78. J u b i n v i l l e , R., B u l l e t i n o f t h e C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n f o r t h e P r e v e n t i o n of C r i m e , X I I , 4, J a n u a r y 1983, p . 2. Kant, Fundamental P r i n c i p l e s of the M e t a p h y s i c s of M o r a l s , Y o r k , B o b b s - M e r r i l l Co., I n c . , 1949.  New  Kerr,  Donna H., ' T h i n k i n g a b o u t E d u c a t i o n w i t h a S t r i c t T y p o l o g y of R i g h t s , ' E d u c a t i o n a l T h e o r y , v . 28, 3, 1978, p. 165-74.  King,  J . C h a r l e s , and James A. M c G i l v r a y , P o l i t i c a l a n d S o c i a l P h i l o s o p h y , New Y o r k , M c G r a w - H i l l Book Company, 1973.  K l e i n i g , J . , 'Human R i g h t s , L e g a l R i g h t s , and S o c i a l Change,' Eugene Kamenka and A l i c e E r h - S o o n T a y , Human R i g h t s , London, Edward A r n o l d , 1978, p . 36-47. , 'Crime and t h e C o n c e p t o f Harm,' A m e r i c a n P h i l o s o p h i c a l Q u a r t e r l y , XIV, 1978, p. 27-36. L a n g f o r d , G l e n n , and D. J . O'Connor ( e d s . ) , New E s s a y s i n P h i l o s p h y o f E d u c a t i o n , L o n d o n , R o u t l e d g e a n d Kegan P a u l , 1 973. Co.,  , R i g h t s , Belmont, C a l i f o r n i a , I n c . , 1979.  Wadsworth P u b l i s h i n g  L u c a s , J . R., 'Or E l s e , ' James R a c h e l s ( e d . ) , M o r a l New Y o r k , H a r p e r and Row, 1971, p . 222-40. L y o n s , D a v i d , 'The C o r r e l a t i v i t y 1970, p . 45-55.  of R i g h t s  Problems,  and D u t i e s , '  Nous, 4,  , ' A g a i n s t E q u a l i t y , ' Hugh A.Bedau ( e d . ) , J u s t i c e and E q u a l i t y , New J e r s e y , E n g l e w o o d C l i f f s , P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1971, p . 1 38-51 . M a b b o t t , J . D., 'Punishment,' J . C h a r l e s K i n g a n d James A. E . M c G i l v r a y , P o l i t i c a l and S o c i a l P h i l o s o p h y , New M c G r a w - H i l l Book Company, 1973, p . 373-84. MacDonald, Margaret,  'Natural  Rights,'  A. I . M e l d e n , Human  York,  143  R i g h t s , Belmont, C a l i f o r n i a , I n c . , 1970, p . 40-60.  Wadsworth P u b l i s h i n g Co.,  M c C l o s k e y , Hugh, 'A R i g h t t o E q u a l i t y ? R e - e x a m i n i n g t h e Case for a Right t o E q u a l i t y , ' Canadian J o u r n a l of Philosophy, V I , v . 4, December 1976, p . 625-42. M a r t i n s o n , R., 'What w o r k s ? - - Q u e s t i o n s and A n s w e r s About Reform,' The P u b l i c I n t e r e s t , v . 35, S p r i n g 1974.  Prison  Mayo, B e r n a r d , 'What a r e Human R i g h t s ? ' D. D. Raphael (ed.), P o l i t i c a l T h e o r y a n d t h e R i g h t s o f Man, B l o o m i n g t o n a n d London, I n d i a n a U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1967, p. 68-80. M e l d e n , A. I . , R i g h t s a n d R i g h t B l a c k w e l l , 1959.  Conduct, Oxford,  , Human R i g h t s , B e l m o n t , C a l i f o r n i a , P u b l i s h i n g Co., I n c . , 1970. ,  'The P l a y o f R i g h t s , ' M o n i s t ,  Basil Wadsworth  56, 1972, p . 479-  502. , ' O l a f s o n on t h e R i g h t t o E d u c a t i o n , ' James F. D o y l e ( e d . ) , E d u c a t i o n a l J u d g e m e n t s , L o n d o n , R o u t l e d g e and Kegan P a u l , 1973, p. 196-205. Mill,  J . S., 'On L i b e r t y , ' J . C h a r l e s K i n g and James A. M c G i l v r a y , P o l i t i c a l and S o c i a l P h i l o s o p h y , New Y o r k , M c G r a w - H i l l Book Company, 1973, p . 373-84  M i l l e r , W. A., 'A T h e o r y of P u n i s h m e n t , ' P h i l o s o p h y , XLV, O c t o b e r , 1970, p. 307-16. Miller,  David,  Social  Justice,  Oxford,  Clarendon  P r e s s , 1976.  M i l l e r , L.M.P., "Towards E q u a l i t y o f E d u c a t i o n a l O p p o r t u n i t y T h r o u g h S c h o o l D i s t r i c t s i n S t a t e B u r e a u s : An I n n o v a t i o n i n C o r r e c t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n , " H a r v a r d J o u r n a l on L e g i s l a t i o n , v.1, 1978, p . 222-47. M i l n e , A. J . M., 'The I d e a o f Human R i g h t s : A C r i t i c a l I n q u i r y , ' F. E . D o w r i c k ( e d . ) , Human R i g h t s , Saxon House, U n i v e r s i t y of Durham, 1979, p . 23-40. M o r i n , L u c i e n , 'Inmate R i g h t t o E d u c a t i o n , ' i n L u c i e n M o r i n ( e d . ) , On P r i s o n E d u c a t i o n , O t t a w a , M i n i s t e r o f S u p p l y a n d S e r v i c e s , 1981, p . 23-33. , a n d J . W. Cosman, ' E d u c a t i o n and C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e : The E d u c a t i o n a l A p p r o a c h t o P r i s o n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , ' U n p u b l i s h e d p a p e r , 1984. Morris,  Herbert,  'Persons  and P u n i s h m e n t , ' A . I . M e l d e n , Human  144  R i g h t s , Belmont, C a l i f o r n i a , I n c . , 1970, p . 97-111.  Wadsworth P u b l i s h i n g Co.,  Murphy, J . G., ' R i g h t s a n d B o r d e r l i n e C a s e s , ' , v . 19, 1977, p. 228-41. Nielsen,  Kai,  'Human R i g h t s , ' M o n i s t ,  A r i z o n a Law Review  v . 52, 4, 1968, p . 573-94.  N i e t z s c h e , F r i e d r i c h , 'On t h e G e n e a l o g y o f M o r a l s , ' J . C h a r l e s K i n g and James A. M c G i l v r a y , P o l i t i c a l and S o c i a l P h i l o s o p h y , M c G r a w - H i l l Book Co., 1973, p . 256-66. Nozick,  R., A n a r c h y , S t a t e , and U t o p i a , B a s i c , 1974.  O l a f s o n , F. A., ' R i g h t s a n d D u t i e s i n E d u c a t i o n , ' James F . D o y l e ( e d . ) , E d u c a t i o n a l Judgements, London, R o u t l e d g e a n d Kegan P a u l , 1973, p. 173-95. O n t a r i o I n s t i t u t e f o r S t u d i e s i n E d u c a t i o n , A Review o f P e n i t e n t i a r y E d u c a t i o n and T r a i n i n g , Phase I : R e p o r t t o R e v i e w e r s , , A u g u s t 1978. P a r l e t t , T. A. A., ' C o r r e c t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n As I t I s , And As I t S h o u l d Be,' P a p e r s P r e s e n t e d a t t h e Symposium on P r i s o n E d u c a t i o n , T r o i s R i v i e r e s , Quebec, Canada, J u l y 9 1981, p. 89-98. P e f f e r , R., 'A D e f e n s e o f R i g h t s t o W e l l - b e i n g , ' P u b l i c A f f a i r s , 1978, v . 8, p. 65-87. P e t e r s , R. S., E t h i c s a n d E d u c a t i o n , Co., 1966. Prison  Education  P h i l o s o p h y and  London, S c o t t , Foresman a n d  Program, Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y ,  undated.  Q u i n t o n , A. M., 'On P u n i s h m e n t , ' H. B. A c t o n , The P h i l o s o p h y of P u n i s h m e n t , M a c M i l l a n , S t . M a r t i n ' s P r e s s , 1969, p . 55-64. R a p h a e l , D. D., 'Human R i g h t s , O l d a n d New,' D. D. Raphael ( e d . ) , P o l i t i c a l T h e o r y a n d t h e R i g h t s o f Man, B l o o m i n g t o n and London, I n d i a n a U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1967, p . 54-67. Rawls, J . , A T h e o r y o f J u s t i c e , U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1971.  C a m b r i d g e , Mass.,  Harvard  R o s s , R. R. a n d E . F a b i a n o , Time t o T h i n k : C o g n i t i o n a n d C r i m e / L i n k a n d R e m e d i a t i o n , O t t a w a : S o l i c i t o r - G e n e r a l , 1981. , Time t o T h i n k , A C o g n i t i v e Model of D e l i n q u e n c y P r e v e n t i o n and O f f e n d e r R e h a b i l i t a t i o n , Tennessee, I n s t i t u t e of S o c i a l S c i e n c e s and A r t s , I n c . , 1985. Sandeman, G., "Programs f o r Women," P r o c e e d i n g s  of the N a t i o n a l  1 45  C o n f e r e n c e on P r i s o n E d u c a t i o n , V i c t o r i a , C a n a d a , O c t o b e r 13-15, 1981, p . 387-91. S a w a t s k y R e p o r t , The, R e p o r t  o f t h e Task F o r c e  British  Columbia,  no.8, 1985.  S c h a r f , P., 'The Idea o f F a i r n e s s a s t h e B a s i s f o r t h e E d u c a t i o n a l R e f o r m o f t h e P r i s o n , ' L u c i e n M o r i n ( e d . ) , On P r i s o n E d u c a t i o n , O t t a w a , M i n i s t e r of S u p p l y a n d S e r v i c e s , 1981, p . 230-44. , a n d J . H i c k e y , 'The P r i s o n and t h e I n m a t e ' s C o n c e p t i o n o f l e g a l J u s t i c e : An E x p e r i m e n t i n D e m o c r a t i c E d u c a t i o n , ' C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e a n d B e h a v i o u r , 1976, v . 3:2 S c h e f f l e r , I s r a e l , Reason and T e a c h i n g , Co., Inc ., 1973.  New Y o r k ,  S u t t o n , Thomas L., 'Human R i g h t s a n d C h i l d r e n , ' T h e o r y , v . 28, 2, S p r i n g 1978, p . 102-10.  Bobbs-Merrill  Educational  Thomas, A l a n M., L e t t e r t o t h e E d i t o r , G l o b e a n d M a i l , 11 1983. U n i t e d N a t i o n s Minimum S t a n d a r d s f o r t h e T r e a t m e n t C o n n e c t i c u t D e p a r t m e n t o f C o r r e c t i o n s , 1974. Vancouver  Sun, A p r i l  February  of Offenders,  18 1987.  V l a s t o s , G r e g o r y , ' J u s t i c e and E q u a l i t y , ' J . C h a r l e s James A. M c G i l v r a y ( e d s . ) , P o l i t i c a l and S o c i a l M c G r a w - H i l l Book Co., 1973, p . 306-14.  K i n g and Philosophy,  W a l k e r , Owen, 'Why S h o u l d I r r e s p o n s i b l e O f f e n d e r s be E x c u s e d ? ' J o u r n a l of P h i l o s o p h y , L X V I , v . 10, May 22 1969, p . 279-90. W a s s e r s t r o m , R i c h a r d , ' R i g h t s , Human R i g h t s , a n d R a c i a l D i s c r i m i n a t i o n , ' James R a c h e l ( e d . ) , M o r a l P r o b l e m s , Y o r k , H a r p e r and Row, 1971, p . 109-25. White, A l a n ,  Rights,  Oxford,  Clarendon  New  P r e s s , 1984.  W h i t e h o u s e , W. A., 'A T h e o l o g i c a l P e r s p e c t i v e , ' F . E . D o w r i c k ( e d . ) , Human R i g h t s , Saxon House, U n i v e r s i t y o f Durham, 1979, p . 41-50. W i l l i a m s , Peter C , 'Losing C l a i m s of R i g h t s , ' I n q u i r y , v . 12, 1978, p . 178-96.  Journal  of V a l u e  Young, R., ' E d u c a t i o n a n d t h e R i g h t s of C h i l d r e n a n d A d o l e s c e n t s , ' E d u c a t i o n a l P h i l o s o p h y , 1976, v . 8, p. 17-31.  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0055731/manifest

Comment

Related Items