Incarceration Vs Community Corrections

Incarceration fails to reduce crime rates related to drug-related offenses. Often, criminals arrested for drug offenses commit such crimes because of their addiction to drugs. Their sentencing would be more effective if carried out by community corrections programs such as drug treatments that specifically target the problem of drug addiction. International instruments such as the 1988 U.N. Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances and the U.N. General Assembly Guiding Principles on Drug Demand Reduction urge governments to embark on community corrections programs. These programs such as drug education and treatment programs for first-time offenders assist governments to deal effectively with the drug

Community corrections are viable alternatives to incarceration offered to offenders at various stages of the criminal justice process. The goals of community correction programs are to contribute to public safety and to reduce future crime rates. In the United States, the major types of community corrections are parole and probation. Parole is a mechanism that removes offenders from prisons and returns them to the society for them to serve the remaining portion of their sentence while maintaining supervision and accountability through the criminal justice system (BOJ, 2016). Probation, on the other hand, is the arrangement for a convicted criminal to continue to live in the community under the supervision of judicial authority in lieu of incarceration. Probation may involve the offender attending certain courses such as therapy or treatment programs (BOJ,

It also highlights the changing focus of disciplinary measures from punishment to re-integration. The implementation of penal sanctions in the society instead of through a procedure of isolation from it presents in the long-term better protection of the society (Blumstein & Piquero, 2007). There are economic arguments for alternatives such as community corrections. Supervising criminals within the community corrections system is less costly than the upkeep of a prisoner. Moreover, community corrections have proven to cause a reduction in crime while being cost effective. A study undertaken by the Department of Justice in 2010 showed that states that spend more on community corrections programs such as education, probation and rehabilitation have lower crime rates as compared to those that spend more on incarcerations. State and federal agencies could save roughly $3 billion per year if they reduced the prison population by 10 percent through increased community corrections programs (Linh et al., 2010, p.70). New Jersey successfully saved $14 million during its 2010 fiscal year because of its Halfway Back Community Corrections program that assisted people on parole with job placement, educational coaching, and classes on anger management. Mississippi also benefited in 2009 when it saved $ 6.5 million in its fiscal year by submitting 2900 cases for parole that year (Linh et al., 2010,