More handpicked essays just for you.
The effectiveness of community corrections
The effectiveness of community corrections
Crime control model of corrections
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
This essay provides answers to the following prompts:
1. What is the community model of corrections?
2. What is the crime control model of corrections?
3. What are the differences between prisons and jails?
4. What is your opinion about the constitutional rights of prisoners?
1. What is the community model of corrections?
This model of corrections main purpose was to reintroducing the offenders in to the community. This Program was invented to help offenders in the transition from jail to the community, aid in the processes of finding jobs and stay connected to their families and the community. The needs of these individuals are difficult: the frequency of substance abuse, mental illness, unemployment, and homelessness is elevated among the jail population.
This model of corrections was designed to help the inmate reach a level where they can be reintegrated in to the community, therefore taking these individuals to a stage where they are able to be rehabilitated.
To support reintegration, correctional workers are to serve as advocates for offenders in dealing with government agencies assisting with employment counseling services, medical treatment, and financial assistance. They argued that corrections focal point should be increasing opportunities for the offenders, to become law abiding citizens and on providing psychological treatment. This model of corrections advocates avoiding imprisonment if possible for the offender and also in favor of probation, therefore offenders can obtain an education and vocational training that would help their adjustment in the community. In the community model corrections advocated for inmates incarcerated to spend very limited time in prison before been granted parole.
Thi...
... middle of paper ...
... close family member will be devastating to me. There are individuals that regardless of the time spend in jail will not be rehabilitated, and are more than likely to reoffend when release from prison. To my believe once a person takes someone life’s or rapes and kill a person, the offender has taken away the victims’ rights and the state or federal government should do the same to the offender.
I’m pro for death penalty because I believe that people who go out and are ready to take someone’s live, at that moment they are forfeiting their own right to live. I believe that the death penalty should be used only when the crime is very violent and heinous, but I believe that no individual should go out certain that regardless of how cruel, vicious, or hideous the murder is, they themselves will not suffer the death penalty knowing that their rights will be protected.
Rehabilitation also involves programs in prisons that have the goal of helping offenders return back to society (Goff, 2014, p.20). Prisons have also put in place programs to assist inmates, “the goal of these release programs are to ease the transition of offenders from the institution into the community while simultaneously promoting stable employment after release” (Cullen & Jonson, 2011, p.309). If a person has been in an institution for a long period of time it is often hard to adjust to life outside, which is why these programs are important in the justice
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.
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-prison and post-release vocational training and work programs evaluations have shown that they are considered to be most effective, as they greatly reduce the rate of recidivism. Steady employment and educational services are some of the main factors in delaying or preventing an individual from re-offending in the first three years following release. More reentry programs are using the comprehensive strategy in response to what research and evaluations have found. Comprehensive strategies are applied in the state and local levels of government, mainly relying on community-based groups to coordinate and provide services for those re-entering society. These programs usually start before a prisoners release and provide assistance in receiving employment, housing, substance abuse, and mental health
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.
There would need to be staff trained to identify underlying problems, treat the problems, and supervise the offenders while they are in the recovery phase of the correction process. If the offender is allowed to work on the issues which cause the criminal actions while remaining in society they would benefit in not having to readjust once they left the prison environment. This would be accomplished through more community corrections and probation.
This paper examines the advantages and disadvantages of ex-offender reentry. Factors contributing to recidivism include law enforcement officers mistrust for reentry prisoners; lack of familial and community support; difficulties gaining employment due to criminal background, obstacles pertaining to housing. Factors that may reduce recidivism, increase public safety and facilitate ex-offender reintegration transitions, as well as detrimental factors of recidivism are examined. Lastly, the important role of parole officers for ex-offenders and the level of supervision ex-offenders receive are also explored in this paper.
It is undeniable that mass incarceration devastates families, and disproportionately affects those which are poor. When examining the crimes that bring individuals into the prison system, it is clear that there is often a pre-existing pattern of hardship, addiction, or mental illness in offenders’ lives. The children of the incarcerated are then victimized by the removal of those who care for them and a system which plants more obstacles than imaginable on the path to responsible rehabilitation. Sometimes, those returned to the community are “worse off” after a period of confinement than when they entered. For county jails, the problem of cost and recidivism are exacerbated by budgetary constraints and various state mandates. Due to the inability of incarceration to satisfy long-term criminal justice objectives and the very high expenditures associated with the sanction, policy makers at various levels of government have sought to identify appropriate alternatives(Luna-Firebaugh, 2003, p.51-66).
Zhang, S. X., Roberts, R. E. L., & Callanan, V. J. (2006). Preventing parolees from returning to prison through community-based reintegration. Crime & Delinquency, 52(4), 551-571.
Meanwhile, with the pressure of budge shortfalls, rehabilitation increasingly becomes to be one of the most effective way to place offenders. Restorative justice is a criminal rehabilitation system that aims to reduce recidivism rates. In Minnesota and Vermont, restorative justice programs have been implemented as a rehabilitation tool, rather than abolishing imprisonment. The main idea is that offenders could benefit from reduced sentences by completing programs (Immarigeon, 1995). Drug rehabilitation is one of the programs that have been proved to be effective on reducing recidivism rates. The programs include the “in-prison treatment” , “the work release program” and aftercare program. It is reported by the Federal Bureau of Prisons that drug offenders accounts for a large part of prisoners housed in federal prisons, which is about 52.2 percent (Rosansky, n.d.). In the study, it is found that more than 75 per cent of offenders who complete the programs do not recidivate. The reason why this program succeeded is that the policy makers target the potential collateral consequence that it is difficult for prisoners to reintegrate into society after the
Sung, L. G.-e. (2011). Rethinking Corrections: Rehabilitation, Reentry, and Reintegration. Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publications.
The increased growth of probationers has placed a strain on the workload of probation officers throughout time creating a less personal approach to community corrections (Still et. al., 2016). A revamping, restructuring, as well as revision of the revenue allotted to community corrections, is required to allow for an increased success rate of probation. As noted earlier in my response, the majority of offenders within the United States are assigned to community corrections shifting away from incarceration. This shift is setting the stage for an opportunity to revise the way probation and parole are handled to allow for an increased success rate of reform through the use of proven effective rehabilitation strategies similar to those used by John Augustus.
This model of corrections had an excellent goal in helping criminals to recover from whatever caused them to commit crimes. The positive side of this program is twofold. First the program would help the ill to recover and secondly it was supposed to stop the criminal from re-offending. Although this program seems to be a great idea there are also downfalls to the idea. The main problem with this program is how you would evaluate the persons illness. For example, if someone was caught stealing or selling drugs, how do you determine that they have some sort of fixable problem or illness? Maybe they were just hungry or wanted money and there is nothing wrong with them that can be treated psychologically. Another example of a problem with this system is how woul...
...hrough a long and complicated process of development. The goal of community service has not always been clear. However, due to increasing in the prison population, community-based corrections is now seen as a good alternative to incarceration due to its rehabilitative nature and cost savings. Communities also support non-incarceration measures for offenders who commit minor offenses. Community-based sanctions are more humane and even more effective in reducing the problem of recidivism. The biggest problem to reforming the system is the perception that offenders are inherently bad, and they cannot be reformed. Evidence from research suggests that rehabilitative programs aimed at restorative justice as opposed to retributive justice are good for all the parties. Importantly, it addresses the criminal tendencies that led to the commission of crime in the first place.
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.