“like heavy waves, the various forms of crime control appear, disappear – and appear again. Or maybe a picture of a pendulum in motion would be better” (Christie, 1981, p. 70).

The pendulum moved in the 1970s away from the treatment ideology. This ideology had emphasized that treatment-oriented sanctions should be tailored to the individual; therefore a number of indeterminate sentences were implemented. Offenders were released when the treatment or resocialization was considered complete.

The movement away from the treatment ideology was initiated by criticism of the very long prison terms the system of indeterminate sentencing resulted in for even less serious offenses. The treatment concept was further criticized as a false ideology that embellished the picture of the conditions in prisons. Finally, criminological research was unable to confirm the assumption that crime problems could be solved through individually tailored sanctions or therapeutic measures.

The position to which the pendulum moved after the treatment ideology is often called neoclassicism. “Neo” because it was a renaissance of the classical penal ideology that had dominated before the treatment ideology. Neoclassicism, however, cannot be said to have left as deep an imprint on Danish crime policy as it has in many other countries.

The neoclassical movement was seeded by criticism of the treatment concept. Since the cornerstone of this criticism was the lack of proportionality between offenses and sanctions, this element became central to the neoclassical approach.