Criminal justice programs around the world face various challenges especially in rehabilitating the behavior of inmates within correctional facilities. The purpose of this research paper will be to assess the various issues that exist in rehabilitative programs within prison systems. Basically, rehabilitation programs are used to correct and rehabilitate criminal offenders so that they can emerge as useful members of society once they complete their prison sentences. Some of the rehabilitation programs that are commonly used to reform inmates include counseling, health and fitness programs, transcendental meditation, academic programs and religious programs. These rehabilitative programs are usually based on the assumption that criminal behavior in most suspects is caused by some contributing factor such as a history of violence, psychological or mental disorders (Barkan & Bryjak, 2009).
Such an assumption does not refute that some criminals make their own personal choices to break the law but rather it argues that these personal choices are usually caused by certain factors which contribute to criminal behavior. Rehabilitation programs are therefore based on such perspectives where the various correctional programs are designed to deal with criminal enforcing behavior. For example counseling programs could focus on the behavior that led to the criminal offender committing the offense while educational programs could focus on how to change negative behavior to positive behavior. Correctional programs in prison facilities are therefore important in reducing the recurrence of criminal behavior as well as reducing recidivism among probationers and parolees (Barkan & Bryjak, 2009).
In general, rehabilitation programs have been effe...
... middle of paper ...
...on are usually focused on keeping the prisoners mentally happy. Religious programs provide inmates with coping mechanisms and spiritual guidance which enable them to deal with prison life. These programs also provide forums for prisoners where they can be able to forgive motivate and reconcile with their fellow inmates within the prison (O’Conner & Pallone, 2003). The efficacy of these programs has also not been determined by criminologists given that most prisoners who practice religion in prison fail to do so once they are released. Religious programs are therefore seen as temporary measures that enable prisoners to find spiritual solace in either Christian religious programs or Qaran readings. The overall effectiveness of these programs will however be determined by the number of prisoners who have not recorded any repeat offenses on being released from prison.
In today’s society, many people commit crimes and illegal behavior is nothing new. Society knows that there are criminals and they have criminal intentions. The question today is not if people are going to commit crimes, it is finding the most effective method to help those criminals reenter society as productive citizens, and preventing new people from becoming criminals. Department of corrections around the nation have implemented a program that identifies the most effective method. The “what works” movement outlines four general principles that are implemented in the rehabilitation of criminals; and, these principles are risk principle, criminogenic need principle, treatment principle, and fidelity principle.
This essay begins with the introduction of the Risk-Needs-Responsivitiy Model which was developed to assess offending and offer effective rehabilitation and treatment (Andrews & Bonta, 2007). The R-N-R model “remains the only empirically validated guide for criminal justice interventions that aim to help offenders” (Polashek, 2012, p.1) consisting of three principles which are associated with reductions in recidivism of up to 35% (Andrew & Bonta, 2010); risk, need and responsivity. Firstly, the risk principle predicts the offenders risk level of reoffending based on static and dynamic factors, and then matched to the degree of intervention needed. Secondly, the R-N-R targets individual’s criminogenic needs, in relation to dynamic factors. Lastly, the responsivity principle responds to specific responsivity e.g. individual needs and general responsivity; rehabilitation provided on evidence-based programming (Vitopoulous et al, 2012).
Every civilization in history has had rules, and citizens who break them. To this day governments struggle to figure out the best way to deal with their criminals in ways that help both society and those that commit the crimes. Imprisonment has historically been the popular solution. However, there are many instances in which people are sent to prison that would be better served for community service, rehab, or some other form of punishment. Prison affects more than just the prisoner; the families, friends, employers, and communities of the incarcerated also pay a price. Prison as a punishment has its pros and cons; although it may be necessary for some, it can be harmful for those who would be better suited for alternative means of punishment.
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.
In The United States the number of people in prison is over two million, and of those two million it is estimated that two thirds of them will be back in prison within three years (Correctional Populations). Some people argue that rehabilitation is the most effective way to handle prisoners, but the risks don’t outweigh the benefits, especially for murderers. Nobles was an example of a murderer who appeared rehabilitated, but under close examination of his actions, he was no more than a manipulating sociopath. Nobles was not rehabilitated because his actions in court showed how he felt, his faith was a facade, and he was a schizophrenic.
Cognitive approaches include but are not limited to social skills training, which uses modeling and role-play, social problem-solving training, rational-emotive therapy, the cognitive skills program, often referred to as the Reasoning and Rehabilitation program, and the relapse prevention model (Pearson & Lipton et al., 2002). Throughout history, it has become very clear that the tough on crime model just does not work. As stated by Drago & Galbiati et al. In their article: Prison Conditions and Recidivism, although it is to some extent a popular view that being tough on inmates can ‘‘rehabilitate’’ them, we do not find evidence supporting the idea that harsher prison conditions reduce recidivism.... ...
Most prisons would offer some form of education for the inmates, whether it is academic or religious based. The dynamic of imprisonment is centered on discipline and education, a balance between punishment and reformation (Adams et al., 1994). The programs provided a constructive activity for the inmates that provided a “dynamic security” for the prison (Adams et al., 1994). In order for the programs to be successful, the staff must pay attention to each offender’s personal needs. As Adams et al. (1994) found, the inmates with the lowest education levels benefitted from the program most. The offenders, through educational programs, could prepare for reentering the work force and receive an education they may not have had in the past (Phelps, 2011). However, the effectiveness of educational programs on recidivism has been debated. The programs give inmates an opportunity to further their education, but does the program actually help them from relapsing? Linden & Perry (1983) focused on Project Newgate in their evaluation of prison education programs. They were able to conclude that although the programs benefit the prisoners academically, there is little to no evidence that is has an impact on preventing recidivism (Linden & Perry, 1983). Though the programs are beneficial to prisons, more treatment is needed for the prisons in order to prevent them from reoffending. The shift from
Although, some prisons do have some rehabilitation programs for the inmates that need it, the therapy sometimes does not help. More than half of prisoners reoffend within at least three years of leaving prisons. Those who reoffend tend to have more severe and more aggressive offenses than previously. A man by the name of Brandy Lee has shown that by having a very strict program in prisons with violent offenders in San Francisco jails reduced the amount of violence in jails. The program also helped to reduce the rate of violent re-offences after leaving the jail by over 50
The current prison and criminal justice system has not proven to be helpful in rehabilitating offenders and preventing recidivism. To successfully alter this situation it is important to understand what steps and measures are available to assist those who find themselves imprisoned. The techniques used in cognitive behavioral therapy have proven to be effective in treating depression, anxiety and drug addictions among other things. Analyzing the techniques developed in cognitive behavioral theory and applying them to psychotherapy in prison environments can assist in making improvements in the prevention of criminal activity, rates of incarceration and safety and security of the general population. The literature shows that the use of cognitive behavioral therapy has been effective in the treatment of a variety of criminal offenders.
The goals of juvenile corrections are too deter, rehabilitate and reintegrate, prevent, punish and reattribute, as well as isolate and control youth offenders and offenses. Each different goal comes with its own challenges. The goal of deterrence has its limits; because rules and former sanctions, as well anti-criminal modeling and reinforcement are met with young rebellious minds. Traditional counseling and diversion which are integral aspects of community corrections can sometimes be ineffective, and studies have shown that sometimes a natural self intervention can take place as the youth grows older; resulting in the youth outgrowing delinquency.
Wormith, J. S., Althouse, R., Simpson, M., Reitzel, L. R., Fagan, T. J., & Morgan, R. D. (2007). The rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders: The current landscape and some future directions for correctional psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(7), 879-892.
Education has been proven to reduce recidivism rates and increase the success of an offender’s re-integration into society. In a study conducted in 1994 by the American Bureau of Justice Statistics, nearly half of the 302,309 released offenders surveyed in fifteen different states were convicted of a new crime within three years of their release. This data shows that prison fails to properly rehabilitate offenders, since after prison ex-convicts continue to live in a way th...
Sung, L. G.-e. (2011). Rethinking Corrections: Rehabilitation, Reentry, and Reintegration. Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publications.
Reintegrating offenders into society is an important part of incarceration. Within the United States justice system, we are often more concerned with the punishment of the offender and neglect to assist them in reentering society. By developing programs that are different from the formal control agencies which offender’s encounter upon release, we can hopefully begin to see a decrease in offender recidivism across the United States. When reintegrating an offender back into a community, it is important to involve the community (Young, Taxman & Byrne, 2002). Research has shown that when there are more control agents, rather than just the formal ones of the state, holding the offender accountable, their chances of successful reentry is higher
Religious discrimination in prison is a major problem. In 2011, Holt v. Hobbs was brought before the Supreme Court. Gregory Holt was a Muslim inmate who was denied to grow his beard for religious purposes by the Arkansas Department of Correction (Vallely). Some prisons around the U.S are ignoring prisoner’s religious rights and making them suffer by forcing them to stop their religious activities. Inmates are being tormented because of their beliefs and prisons are doing little or nothing to protect them. It should not matter what religion one follows when spending time in prison, and it should not change the way people treat them. Many prisoners have been tormented by officials and other prisoners for the religion they follow. It has a long term effect on some because the verbal and physical abuse they get will never be forgotten. The government must monitor the officials in charge to assure they are protecting those being bullied for their