Electronic Monitoring: It Is a Tool, Not a Silver Bullet

Explaining the Consequences of Imprisonment for Union Formation and Dissolution in Denmark

“…The United States has comparatively high probation and parole rates, which places great workloads on probation and parole officers. Put directly, placing more people under community supervision (such as on electronic monitoring) would probably require significant increases in funding to the community corrections field (DeMichele, ). In Denmark, where the workload of community supervision personnel is generally lower, the organizational friction associated with increasing the amount of offenders under electronic monitoring is likely to be lower.…”

“…Even so, results from Denmark could inspire policymakers in other countries to be attentive to some of the positive aspects of the Danish implementation of electronic monitoring (e.g., Payne, ). Electronic monitoring in Denmark, just like any other correctional measure, is a tool applied in certain ways by certain people in certain contexts (DeMichele, ). Handpicking from the way this correctional tool is used in Denmark, and in other contexts, could help to assemble electronic monitoring in, for example, the United States, in a way that could improve offender outcomes relative to imprisonment.…”

“…Home confinement under electronic monitoring is, in this sense, a specific treatment package implemented in a specific way attuned to the Danish context, something we return to in the Discussion section. The anklet itself, at least primarily, is simply a technological tool that enables home confinement and secures compliance with the treatment package—or at least sets off an alert when the conditions of that treatment package are breached (DeMichele, ). When referring to electronic monitoring in this paper, it denotes a treatment package that consists of each of these elements.…”

Electronic Monitoring in Denmark and Beyond

“…The research article by Andersen and Andersen () is followed by two policy essays, by Brian K. Payne (, this issue) and Matthew DeMichele (, this issue), respectively. You will detect some common themes in these essays, which is not surprising as they have coauthored several articles together focused on electronic monitoring and attitudes toward electronic monitoring in the United States.…”

“…Both Payne () and DeMichele () also applaud the Denmark study by Andersen and Andersen () and recognize the importance of focusing on welfare dependency as opposed to recidivism. In essence, although not complete, the Denmark study takes a look into the black box of the potential relationship between electronic monitoring and recidivism by focusing on one possible mediating variable—welfare dependence or unemployment.…”