Community corrections programs in the United States are founded upon the same principles of promoting public safety and security by housing any individual that has broken the laws established by society. However, while there are several similarities there are also several differences in each individual states correctional programs and philosophies. Consequently, those similarities and differences for the states of North Carolina and Oregon will be individually analyzed and explored.
The state of North Carolina advocates its mission to be the protection and safety of its citizens throughout the state by providing viable alternatives and meaningful supervision to offenders placed in their custody. The goal in North Carolina for the Division of Community Corrections is to use practices that have been empirically tested and have been shown to reduce recidivism among offenders. The emphasis is to use evidence based practices to meet the state’s overall goal of “no new crime and no new victims” (North Carolina Division of Community Corrections). It is plain to see that this state’s concentration is to accomplish their mission by reaching an equal balance of control and treatment for offenders that will positively affect their behavior and lifestyle patterns (North Carolina Division of Community Corrections).This mission statement in itself indicates that the state of North Carolina is willing to invest the time, energy, and budget that is needed to rehabilitate the offenders in their correctional system. This mission statement also indicates that this state takes the responsibility as a whole for their correctional system. Therefore, the state’s mission is to rehabilitate its offenders.
However, the state of Oregon on the other ha...
... middle of paper ...
...ams they offer are truly different from one another. Consequently, one could not accurately say that one state’s programs are better than the others since it appears that each state offers what their budget allows them to and what seems to work for each individual state. Therefore, while the rehabilitation efforts of the state of North Carolina seem to lower their recidivism rate the state of Oregon’s principle of holding their offender’s accountable for their actions also seem to impact their recidivism rate as well as being an impressive tactic.
References
North Carolina Division of Community Corrections. Copyright 1995-2010 by North Carolina Department of Correction. Retrieved from http://www.doc.state.nc.us/dcc/index.htm.
Oregon Department of Corrections. Page updated: February 17, 2010. Retrieved from http://egov.oregon.gov/DOC/TRANS/CC/ccwelcome.shtml.
When envisioning a prison, one often conceptualizes a grisly scene of hardened rapists and murderers wandering aimlessly down the darkened halls of Alcatraz, as opposed to a pleasant facility catering to the needs of troubled souls. Prisons have long been a source of punishment for inmates in America and the debate continues as to whether or not an overhaul of the US prison system should occur. Such an overhaul would readjust the focuses of prison to rehabilitation and incarceration of inmates instead of the current focuses of punishment and incarceration. Altering the goal of the entire state and federal prison system for the purpose of rehabilitation is an unrealistic objective, however. Rehabilitation should not be the main purpose of prison because there are outlying factors that negatively affect the success of rehabilitation programs and such programs would be too costly for prisons currently struggling to accommodate additional inmate needs.
Overcrowding in prisons may cause prisoners to not receive the rehabilitative curriculums that they want in order to be reintegrated into society. This is the case in California, with individuals serving their prison sentences in jails, where they do not have the space to incorporate areas to hold the programs necessary for prisoners to assimilate back into society (KQED and Center for Investigative
A sample of inmates released during this period was drawn from a list obtained from the Florida Department of Correction, for a total sample of roughly 3,793 offenders. Careful attention was given to securing a representative sample from each offense group. The offenders chosen were released from public and private state prisons after expiration of their sentences. The centralized idea of this study was to determine the differentiation between public and private state prisons focusing on recidivism. I have chosen two cases that reflect on the central issue of this topic and how they are treated by the Courts which can hopefully shed some light on the research problem as it exists in present society. These cases are based on California's legislative system which relate to the problem of recidivism in Florida.
Community corrections programs are therefore frequently used as a method to reduce the overall percentage of the prison populations. These programs offer supervision that “oversee offenders outside of jail or prison, and are administered by agencies or courts with the legal authority to enforce sanctions” at a significantly lower cost than incarceration (Community Corrections (Probation and Parole), 2015). Although statistics vary, it is believed that approximately two-thirds of the people who could be incarcerated for a crime or offense committed, are actually given a positive alternative option. Typically the people who are given the opportunity to partially or completely bypass incarceration are non-violent offenders who in the long run will be better off if he/she is handled thorough a community corrections program (Alarid, Cromwell, & Del Carmen,
Lipsey, M. W., Chapman, G. L., L & Enberger, N. A. (2001). Cognitive-behavioral programs for offenders. The annals of the american academy of political and social science, 578 (1), pp. 144--157.
...t of people who return back to a law breaking mentality after they get released from prison. When you release people instead use these alternatives versus confinement it is less of a waste of expensive resources, taxpayer’s money, as well as time. A medium between control and treatment needs to be met in all of the prisons, or jails. Some men or women need more strict conditions and supervision practices while others may just need more of the services that should be offered such as rehabilitation, and alcohol or drug prevention. Any of these options will not be easy nor diminish this overcrowding issue quickly. It will take time, patience, and cooperation with both the inmates or ex-offenders family, friends, courts as well as law enforcement and jails.
Throughout history, changes have occurred all around us. More specifically, our correctional facilities. As community members commit crimes, our jails and prisons provide the deterrence, punishment, retribution and rehabilitation needed to become a successful member of the community again. When offenders enter into the correctional facilities, restrictive housing and administration segregation play a role in providing safety to inmates and to staff members. By looking at how restrictive housing and administration segregation was established, evolved, and how it plays a role in today’s society, we as citizens can learn about our correctional facilities and the tasks they use to keep inmates safe and correctional staff.
Prisons and correctional facilities in the United States have changed from rehabilitating people to housing inmates and creating breeding grounds for more violence. Many local, state, and federal prisons and correctional facilities are becoming more and more overcrowded each year. If the Department of Corrections (DOC) wants to stop having repeat offenders and decrease the volume of inmates entering the criminal justice system, current regulations and programs need to undergo alteration. Actions pushed by attorneys and judges, in conjunction current prison life (including solitary confinement), have intertwined to result in mass incarceration. However, prisoner reentry programs haven’t fully impacted positively to help the inmate assimilate back into society. These alterations can help save the Department of Corrections (DOC) money, decrease the inmate population, and most of all, help rehabilitate them. After inmates are charged with a crime, they go through the judicial system (Due Process) and meet with the prosecutor to discuss sentencing.
Nieto, M. (1996). Community corrections punishments: An alternative to incarceration for non-violent offenders. Retrieved March 13, 2011, from http://www.library.ca.gov/crb/96/08/
Sung, L. G.-e. (2011). Rethinking Corrections: Rehabilitation, Reentry, and Reintegration. Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publications.
While other countries use different methods of incarceration-deterrence, incapacitation, and retribution-the United States uses the prison system of rehabilitation. This system of rehabilitation treats every prisoner as an equal that is meant to get the exact...
There are better ways to punish criminals and protect society than mass incarceration. The state and local governments should be tough on crime, but “in ways that emphasize personal responsibility, promote rehabilitation and treatment, and allow for the provision of victim restitution where applicable” (Alec, 2014). The government also succeeds in overseeing punishment but fails to “…take into account the needs of offenders, victims, and their communities.” (Morris, 2002: Pg. 1 and 2). Alternatives to incarceration, such as sentencing circles, victim offender mediation, and family conferences, can successfully hold criminals responsible while allowing them a chance to get “back on their feet”. Research has proven that rehabilitation has lowered the rate of re-offenders, reducing the crime rate, protecting communities and also saves a lot of
With the substantial increase in prison population and various changes that plague correctional institutions, government agencies are finding that what was once considered a difficult task to provide educational programs, inmate security and rehabilitation programs are now impossible to accomplish. From state to state each correctional organization is coupled with financial problems that have depleted the resources to assist in providing the quality of care in which the judicial system demands from these state and federal prisons. Judges, victims, and prosecuting attorneys entrust that once an offender is turned over to the correctional system, that the offender will receive the punishment in which was imposed by the court, be given services that aid in the rehabilitation to those offenders that one day will be released back into society, and to act as a deterrent to other criminals contemplating criminal acts that could result in their incarceration. Has our nations correctional system finally reached it’s critical collapse, and as a result placed or American citizens in harm’s way to what could result in a plethora of early releases of inmates to reduce the large prison populations in which independent facilities are no longer able to manage? Could these problems ultimately result in a drastic increase in person and property crimes in which even our own law enforcement be ineffective in controlling these colossal increases of crime against society?
All over America, crime is on the rise. Every day, every minute, and even every second someone will commit a crime. Now, I invite you to consider that a crime is taking place as you read this paper. "The fraction of the population in the State and Federal prison has increased in every single year for the last 34 years and the rate for imprisonment today is now five times higher than in 1972"(Russell, 2009). Considering that rate along crime is a serious act. These crimes range from robbery, rape, kidnapping, identity theft, abuse, trafficking, assault, and murder. Crime is a major social problem in the United States. While the correctional system was designed to protect society from offenders it also serves two specific functions. First it can serve as a tool for punishing the offender. This involves making the offender pay for his/her crime while serving time in a correctional facility. On the other hand it can serve as a place to rehabilitate the offender as preparation to be successful as they renter society. The U.S correctional system is a quite controversial subject that leads to questions such as how does our correctional system punish offenders? How does our correctional system rehabilitate offenders? Which method is more effective in reducing crime punishment or rehabilitation? Our correctional system has several ways to punish and rehabilitate offenders.
“The history of correctional thought and practice has been marked by enthusiasm for new approaches, disillusionment with these approaches, and then substitution of yet other tactics”(Clear 59). During the mid 1900s, many changes came about for the system of corrections in America. Once a new idea goes sour, a new one replaces it. Prisons shifted their focus from the punishment of offenders to the rehabilitation of offenders, then to the reentry into society, and back to incarceration. As times and the needs of the criminal justice system changed, new prison models were organized in hopes of lowering the crime rates in America. The three major models of prisons that were developed were the medical, model, the community model, and the crime control model.