NCJ Number
29563
Date Published
1975
Length
10 pages
Annotation
THIS ARTICLE CONSIDERS THE PHILOSOPHIES THAT UNDERLIE VICTIM COMPENSATION, THE KINDS OF PROGRAMS THAT RESULT FROM SUCH PHILOSOPHIES, AND THE OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO JURISDICTIONS THAT ELECT TO PROVIDE VICTIM ASSISTANCE.
Abstract
TWO PRINCIPLE REASONS ARE USUALLY GIVEN FOR ENACTING VICTIM COMPENSATION LEGISLATION: 1) THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS AN OBLIGATION TO PROTECT ITS CITIZENS, AND THAT, FAILING THIS, IT HAS THE DUTY TO PROVIDE COMPENSATION FOR ITS FAILURE TO PROTECT; AND 2) THAT CRIME IS UNAVOIDABLE IN OUR SOCIETY AND THAT ITS IMPACTS OR BURDENS SHOULD BE BORN BY SOCIETY IN GENERAL. A THIRD RATIONALE IS SOMETIMES GIVEN FOR AIDING CRIME VICTIMS; THAT IS, THAT THEY NEED HELP. THESE RATIONALES DIRECTLY INFLUENCE THE DRAFTING OF VICTIM COMPENSATION LEGISLATION. THE BENEFITS AND ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS OF MOST COMPENSATION PROGRAMS ARE REVIEWED. IT IS NOTED THAT BENEFITS OF MOST PROGRAMS ARE INADEQUATE, AND THAT NARROW ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS SEVERELY LIMIT THE VALUE OF SOME PROGRAMS. THE THREE BASIC PATTERNS FOR DELIVERING VICTIM COMPENSATION ARE LISTED. THESE ARE 1) DELIVERY THROUGH AN INDEPENDENT ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY, 2) USE OF THE COURTS TO DECIDE AND MAKE AWARES TO VICTIMS, AND 3) DELIVERY THROUGH EXISTING WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION PROGRAMS. FINALLY, THE COST OF VICTIM COMPENSATION PROGRAMS AND THE FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR VICTIM COMPENSATION ARE DISCUSSED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)