9-2 Final Project Submission. Evaluation Report

docx

School

Southern New Hampshire University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

560

Subject

Psychology

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by Mamaguici

1 Evaluation Report Jolene Whittom PSY-624 Intersection of Law and Psychology Professor Holtgrave September 2, 2023

2 Forensic psychiatrists have two primary objectives when working in the criminal justice system, first they need to focus on the deterrence of recidivism, while also providing mental health treatment, and thus this discipline is situated at the confluence betwixt the mental health treatment and the criminal justice system. Literature Review Non-Violent Offenders A non-violent offender is an individual whose criminality does not involve using violence or causing corporeal injury to another person. While the offender is committing the crime their intention individual focuses on a particular objective, for example purse snatchers, drug and alcohol crimes, and white-collar crimes, that does not include causing harm to any person in the vicinity or connected to the crime (Albalawi et al., 2019). Theft is the type of criminality graded by the monetary worth of the destruction or cost to the victim, frequently this type of crime has an emotional impact on the victim because the destroyed or lost item may be sentimentally and/or physically unable inimitable. In America, the most frequently seen drug and alcohol crimes are drug possession charges and driving under the influence (DUI) (Albalawi et al., 2019). The biggest concern with these types of offenses is that when a person commits their first drug or alcohol related offense it is permanently on their record, this mark can make finding employment and housing difficult, which frequently results in the person relapsing back into their substance use and/or criminal behaviors, thus on the path to recidivism. Olayan Albalawi and colleagues (2019) state that there are a substantial number of persons in the judicature that have mental health illnesses, and that court-based forensic divagation programs and partnership services have been created to grapple with these issues, however, research has demonstrated there is elevated rates of mental illness amid prisoners,

3 predominantly psychosis, major affective disorders, and personality disorders that have a comorbidity with substance use disorder, resulting in the prisoners have dual diagnoses. Research has also proven that there is a substantial correlation betwixt having a mental condition and criminality, and there the increased criminality by individuals that have a mentally illness, often results in recidivism (Albalawi et al., 2019). They examined the efficacy of court diversion programs in lessening recidivism amongst persons with a diagnosis of psychosis by examining the groups ordered to get and the comparison grouping that received a disciplinary punishment. Employing Cox regression models to detect causes connected with recidivism, the study resulted in 7743 persons classified as having a diagnosis of a psychotic condition preceding their sentence determination hearing for their initial crime. In total, 26% of the group received a ruling to attend treatment and 74% received a correctional penalty. The recidivism percentage in the treatment grouping was 12% smaller than the correctional penalty grouping. In conclusion, amongst persons with a significant mental disorder, like psychosis, ordered to attend treatment instead of a correctional penalty, there was a decreased probability of reoffending (Albalawi et al., 2019). It is important to note that upon additional examinations showed that if the individual does not receive mental health treatment succeeding their initial crime they had an augmented chance of recidivism, which highlights the imperativeness of treating prisoners’ mental health disorders when the first arrive in the criminal justice system (Albalawi et al., 2019). American states have struggled to restructure the criminal justice system through a ruling usually denoted as the Justice Reinvestment Initiatives (JRI), the purpose being to decrease prison usage focusing on nonviolent offences, and redirecting the money that saved from decreased incarcerations to research-based stratagems that decrease recidivism (Leymon et al., 2022). A plethora of states, including Oregon, are conducting experiments with JRI-related

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

4 approaches amid nonviolent offenders. Oregon's JRI focuses on nonviolent offenders, which includes driving illegally, using illicit substances, and possessions crimes. At the end of 2018, the Bureau of Justice Statistics estimated that 42.3% of the 1.3 million persons incarcerated in Oregon state were in incarcerated for theft of personal assets, illicit substances, or public disorder offenses, which are all non-violent crimes (Leymon et al., 2022). Leymon and associates (2022) reported that owing to rising expenditures and facing the prospective opening of an innovative correctional facility, Oregon adopted its version legislature that focused on non-violent criminalities to decrease prison usage, decrease recidivism, sustain community protection, and raise offender answerability. Their research assessed the effect a non-violent offender’s incarcerated length of stay (LOS) for their first act of criminality had on their future arrests and/or incarcerations for non-violent crimes. This study employed a quasi-experimental scheme, using a marginal means increment by way of stratification (Leymon et al., 2022). These outcomes suggested that legislators could deliberate on ordering briefer sentences minus foregoing public security. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV criteria states that 53.4% of convicts have substance use disorder (SUD), in comparison a projected 13.0% of males and 5.5% of females in societal populaces, aged 18 years or over. Amongst criminals on probation, 69% stated they have used illicit substances, which included 32% admitting to partaking in illicit substances within the month prior to their recent offense (Belenko, Hiller, & Hamilton, 2013). Additionally, 32% of state penitentiary prisoners were actively using illicit substances while they were engaging in criminal offenses, and 16.5% recounted perpetrating their offense to get cash to obtain illicit substances (Belenko, Hiller, & Hamilton, 2013). Illicit drug usage raises the probability of prolonged participation in illegal actions, with higher occurrences of relapsing and

5 recidivism being the cause for criminality by people that are addicted to illicit substances. Now, there are efficacious treatment approaches for non-violent drug offenders. Which includes approaches that link offenders to treatment, for example soon after their arrest, an offender can have a screening, transitory intercession, and recommendation to treatment, or sent to a community treatment program under legal supervision circumstances, or as an alternative to going to prison. Many districts have special drug treatment courts into which offenders may be diverted prior to trial or placed in following conviction and several of these approaches coincide with people who are seeking SUD in their community, such as residentials treatment programs, outpatient treatment programs, being ordered to drug dependency court, and attending Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) or Narcotics Anonymous (NA) meetings (Belenko, Hiller, & Hamilton, 2013). Violent Offenders Forensic psychology has advanced significantly since its inception. In its early development, comprehending violent criminality centered on aberrancy and malady, however, as the discipline advanced through a continuum of interpositions, approaches were created with the intent of eliminating or decreasing derelictions. Forensic practitioners implemented aversion therapies, as a trendy technique to contend with aberrant unrealities, cognitive-behavior treatment utilized a prototype to contest and thwart adverse involuntary feelings and cognitive misrepresentations, whereas psychodynamic treatments wanted to purge persons of their perverse distortions. Taylor and Hocken (2021), posit that by addressing the aspects that facilitate the possibility of criminality, that forensic clinicians must comprehend the roots of such aspects and establish intercessions that identify the practicable facets of criminogenic capabilities. Taylor and Hocken’s (2021) research supply are a hypothetical base for an innovative approach for the treatment of violent criminals called the Trauma Sensitive Practice (TSP), which affords a

6 transformative comprehension of anthropological malignancy together with a synopsis of the effect of hardship and maltreatment on the developing youth. The study posits a primary context that utilizes compassion-focused help for threat reducing interpositions with males that have caused injury to innocent people. The concept is that this novel treatment approach advocates forensic clinicians to utilize a trauma informed method to their interposition treatment plan and implementation. This new treatment approach incorporates compassion-focused treatment to interposition that excogitates criminogenic capabilities which includes holism and functionality within its context. Forensic interpositions do not routinely incorporate Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) into the approach because the research has been lacking in assimilating substantiation from adverse childhood experience study and have consequently experienced limitations in their capability to encompass the effectual roots of criminogenic necessity (Taylor & Hocken, 2021). Forensic clinicians that incorporate aspects of TSP into the interposition treatments afford clinicians the occasion to focus on the prevention of re-offending, whilst also granting offenders the opportunity to process their individual ACE’s and hardships. The TSP method recognizes that children who experience trauma have an increased probability of having a negative psychological affect by the vexing or ominous events, and thus these ACE’s have lifelong impacts on the person’s psychological, emotive, and corporeal welfare (Taylor & Hocken, 2021). The CDC (2023) reports that Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) have the potential to have a huge influence on forthcoming violent behavior, succumbing to distinct types of abuse, becoming a perpetrator, and ACE’s can negatively affect the individual’s health and capacity for personal success. A singular incident, like a severe auto collision, a natural disaster, or the exposure to extended distressing conditions, for instance child maltreatment, witnessing criminality, or neglect can produce ACE’s. It is also important to note that experiencing more

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

7 than one traumatic event in a person’s childhood can impact them as they grow up in a plethora of ways, such as anxiety, melancholy, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and, most markedly, criminality (Taylor & Hocken, 2021). Across the globe, relational violent behavior is the foremost reason for murder, disorder, and incapacity, and a plethora of supplementary harmful health, financial, and societal outcomes. Current assessments indicate that murder is the reason for more than 460,000 fatalities per year globally. In 2016, approximately 1.6 million people in America were in an emergency room for wounds they received from being violently assaulted (Papalia et al., 2019). Violence research by Papalia and colleagues (2019) employed a meta‐analysis that studied whether psychological therapies with violent criminals in penitentiaries and forensic mental health facilities are efficacious in averting public recidivism and institutional transgressions. Their research included twenty-seven controlled studies that contained 7,062 violent offenders, which the study acquired using an extensive search scheme that returned over 13,000 records (Papalia et al., 2019). They found that therapies with violent criminals decreased violent and non-violent re-offense, however, the mean outcome for violent and non-violent transgressions while incarcerated did not achieve statistical significance. Moderator analyses signal several tendencies; yet most impacts were insignificant after alpha‐level adjustments. Results about the effect of psychosomatic therapies are encouraging and imply that multimodal therapies relate to the noteworthiest treatment outcomes (Papalia et al., 2019). The TSP method and multimodal therapy have been two intercessions that have shown success at decreasing re-offenses by primarily focusing on the symptomology of mental health syndromes, partially to progress towards a semblance of mental wellness, but moreover with the expectancy that these intercessions will facilitate in the reduction of recidivism. The challenge

8 that forensic clinicians face is that research has revealed that there are mental syndromes that have a more than by chance connection with violent criminality, therefore when the clinician is creating the treatment plan, those syndromes need to be a risk factor. Research by Hilton and Radatz (2018) theorizes that numerous criminals with mental syndromes and criminals without mental syndromes have many of the identical risk considerations for recidivism; these risk considerations, also called criminogenic needs, contain criminal record, pro‐criminality cohorts, pro‐criminality outlooks, antisocial personality schema, edification/employment difficulties, domestic/matrimonial challenges, alcohol and/or drug dependency, or substance use disorder (SUD). These results acknowledge that theories of efficient correctional interpositions can be valuable when emmeshed into treatment practices utilized with criminals with mental illnesses. The risk need responsivity (RNR) model emphasizes the paramountcy of having the risk principle, or the intenseness of the therapy to the risk proffered by the criminal, confirming that the intercession concentrates extra on the criminogenic need principle, and confirming that analytically maintained modalities are adequately flexible to the multiplicity in criminal populaces, or responsivity (Hilton, & Radatz, 2018). Hilton and Radatz (2018) posit that presently the top evidenced based stance is that therapy for mental syndromes has an encouraging impact on mental health results, however, the reduction in recidivism has a greater impact when combined with addressing criminogenic needs. It is important to recognize that childhood adversity and criminality are not synonymous, there is the aspect of resilience for all the people that also have a multitude of ACEs but do not have penchant for criminality, in fact the research does not show causality. Which indicates that a person seeking treatment for their maladaptive life, which is a result of having more than four ACEs were fourteen times (n=14x) more probable to become a victim of violence, fifteen times

9 (n=15x) more probable to become an offender of violence, and twenty times (n=20x) more probable to have been imprisoned in their lifetime (Bisset, 2018). However, not all youngsters that endure more than four ACEs develop into offenders of violence in maturity, even though they are empirically more prone to criminality than persons who have no ACEs. Although, persons with four or more ACEs, whether incarcerated or in their communities, do share treatments practices, i.e., psychotherapy and having prescribed psychotropic medications, the need for a comorbid treatment protocol for the offenders surpasses what a non-offender would require for treatment because of the need to address the offenders criminality and the employment of the TSP method or multimodal therapy in an attempt to decrease the criminals proclivity to re-offend (Bisset, 2018). Even though there is legislation requiring inmates to receive mental health treatment, a significant percentage of offenders, including violent criminals, with serious mental health disorders, do not have proper treatment due to a substantial dearth of access to suitable mental health treatment in incarcerated environments; three in five individuals (63%) that have a record of a mental health disorder are not provided with mental health services during their incarceration in state and federal penitentiaries (Bisset, 2018). The lack of access to mental health treatment for offenders is also a challenge within society as well, since non-offending persons that need mental health treatment are unable to receive it because of a lack of insurance, time, or feasibility (Bisset, 2018). However, for society members that can seek treatment they often receive better care because they are not in the criminal justice system, and they confined to what the criminal justice system deems important and allows.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

10 Trauma Victims Sex crimes against women is a widespread occurrence in the America, with 18.3% of females and 1.4% males having been a victim of rape, resulting in physically and psychologically deleterious effects in their epochs (Gilmore et al., 2021). Being a victim of a rape can led to considerable mental health challenges involving one or more syndromes, such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), major depression disorder, substance use disorder, and suicidal ideation. Sex crime victims that have a Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examination (SAMFE) conducted after getting raped often do not obtain mental health resources to (Gilmore, 2021). Research by Gilmore and colleagues (2021) has demonstrated that this lack of mental health help received by sex crime victims is correlated to the frequently mentioned contributory barriers, which are a dearth of information regarding available services, monetary limits, time restraints, and additional challenges associated to accessibility to services. The ideal treatment for victims of sex crimes is to conduct a SAMFE and combine it with a post-SAMFE treatment plan. In the study by Gilmore and colleagues (2021) they had a sample base of 37 participants (N = 37), which enrolled from an emergency room after having received a sexual assault medical forensic examination (SAMFE). Ranked linear regressions paradigms studied the efficaciousness of age, cultural individuality, academic standing, having health insurance, association to offender, period since attack, SUD, and PTSD on impediments to accessing treatment, and the probability of looking for mental health care at no cost. Their results demonstrated that the victim’s dearth of insurance created more obstacles in acquiring mental health care and a greater probability of pursuing free post-SAMFE treatment. The next barriers were the victims PTSD anxiety symptomology, which was correlated with increased challenges in accessing treatment (p = 0.038), being a pupil (p = 0.026), and partaking in excessive drinking (p = 0.047) were linked with a decreased probability of pursuing post-SAMFE treatment, whereas amplified

11 symptomologies of PTSD were connected with a increased probability of pursuing post-SAMFE treatment (p = 0.007) (Gilmore et al., 2021). In conclusion, offering post-SAMFE treatment, regardless of insurance status, is necessary to address the mental health exigencies of sex crime victims. Greenwald and Camden (2022) theorize that a rigorous treatment arrangement provides trauma victims the prospect to decrease time to therapy benefits, contrasted with standard weekly psychoanalysis and since affording post-SAMFE treatment is barrier, decreasing the number of treatments may increase victim participation. Forensic clinicians have identified eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) as the most effective of the foremost trauma treatments; however, Progressive Counting (PC) is less resource-exhaustive for clinicians to learn and is as effectual as EMDR. To determine if EMDR or PC had more efficacy the researchers conducted a randomized study, consisting of ninety-six victims of crime, to exhaustive EMDR or exhaustive PC treatments. The most shared types of criminalities endured by partakers were childhood sexual misuse (n = 45; 46.88%), domestic violence (n = 41; 42.71%), and childhood physical maltreatment (n = 39; 40.63%) (Greenwald and Camden, 2022). The outcomes indicated that partakers sustained scientifically and diagnostically substantial advances on measurements of PTSD, manifesting complications, functionality, and overall lifestyle from pre-ministrations to post-ministrations and follow-up, resulting in great to very substantial impact proportions on all measures. The study demonstrated that there were no substantial variations betwixt EMDR or PC on any result, which includes treatment effectiveness, and there was insignificant early participant departure from the study. These conclusions confirm preceding results about the benefit of concentrated trauma-focused treatment and reveal that PC treatment is equivalent to EMDR in the rigorous therapy model.

12 The partakers reported that the therapies were equally helpful, effective, and well endured, which are attributes that make these treatments more likely for traumatized victims of crime to seek (Greenwald and Camden, 2022). Legal and Ethical Considerations Ethical Concerns Mental health clinicians must adhere to ethical guidelines when they are treating violent offenders, non-violent offenders, and trauma victims, however, within the legal system there are constraints that may impede their ability to treat these populaces ethically. Forensic treatment involves mental health evaluations and the assessment and treatment of people that are in the criminal justice system for crimes they perpetrated. A forensic clinician facilitates the perpetrator to analyze the motives for their conduct, the actions perpetrated, and take accountability for them, which can alleviate future reidivism. Where feasible, the clinician will work to thwart recidivism by the perpetrator, while evaluating the offender’s probability that they will perpetrate future criminalities. The most efficacious treatment occurs when the offender and clinician work in a therapeutic, guiding, or advisory aptitude, which is dependent on the offender’s status and the directives of the criminal justice system (Glaser, 2009). It must be noted that the ethical concerns for each of the target populations have some similarities, such as clinician competency, impartiality, fairness, and avoiding conflicts of interest, however, due to the disparity in treatment approaches for each population the ability to ensure ethical treatment is not always an option (Glaser, 2009). Clinicians in sex offender treatment programs (SOTP) are obliged to violate conventional mental health ethical principles so that they can effectively accomplish their results, which can comprise of putting societies interests before those of the offender, constraining confidentiality,

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

13 and the foisting of involuntary treatment (Glaser, 2009). Different from violations in other non- violent offender treatments, where ethical violations allowances are occasionally made within the conventional principles of Non maleficence or beneficence, instead these ethical violations must be enacted routinely (Glaser, 2009). These SOTP’s therefore exhibit the attributes of penalization, instead of efficacious treatment, and, predictably, conventional codes of psychological ethics do not provide any substantial advice to clinicians employing them. Some clinicians argue that ethical principles that justify and limits penalty offers more worth in reducing the tribulations which can be imposed onto offenders partaking in these programs, while upholding the integrity of the clinicians that treat them (Glaser, 2009). A common situation can be when an offender discloses to their clinician that they are intending to relapse and the response is not clear because they inform the pertinent authorities, they would be breaching their ethical obligation to uphold confidentiality, but that places another person at risk, which violates the ethical code of causing no harm. The practical and ethical impasses in sexual offender cases are that there is not a quick and simple solution. While the welfare of the offender and the community do not necessitate constantly being in an ethical conflict, there will be instances when a clinician must choose between the two. Ward (2017) posits that the ethical and legal concerns regarding non-violent offends vary drastically form those of violent offenders because non-violent offenders have no evident history of violent actions and most of this populace is imprisoned because of property or illicit substance crimes. A forensic psychologist is required to perform distinctive tasks that create an intersect betwixt psychology and the criminal justice system; a forensic clinician conducts autonomous psychological assessments to attain information in rejoinder to a specified psycho-legal query. In criminal occurrences, a forensic clinician may be required to assess an offender's history to

14 recognize the individual's struggles and select an applicable treatment strategy. Data from forensic mental health assessments (FMHA) of offenders have substantially affected numerous psycho-legal findings that range from sentencing to provisional release proposals. California’s Proposition 36 requires courts to present non-violent drug-offenders probation with substance use disorder (SUD) treatment as an alternative to being incarcerated for their first two violations; there are numerous state-approved treatment programs that the judge can select for non-violent drug-offenders. Additionally, part of the non-violent criminal's sentence could make community service, literacy training, family counseling, and employment preparation required (Ward, 2017). These programs offer treatment choices such as outpatient programs, residential rehabilitation houses, and narcotic substitution treatment. From a human rights ethical lens, non-violent offenders are concurrently rights-holders, which means that they have a right noy have intrusion into their personal concerns except if they invade the rights of other people; duty-bearers, which states that they have the opportunity to chase individual objectives providing they do not invade the rights of other people; and rights- violators, which is when they invade the rights of other people through criminal behavior (Ward, 2017). Implementing a treatment approach that is founded on a human rights archetypal would provide an ethical treatment choice since it upholds the offender as a rights-holder because it addresses any history of abandonment, maltreatment, and derisory socialization, which also requires supporting the offender to attain objectives in publicly acceptable manners; along with being a duty-bearer, which provides erudition practices and implantation of tools to facilitate the development for having consideration for the rights of other people by enhancing empathetic capacity, problem-resolution ability, supportive societal connections, and intimacy aptitude (Ward, 2017). The risk to offenders’ ethical rights can be an outcome of how the evaluation and

15 treatment assessment was performed, and the effects of those outcomes on their future release arrangements and supervision (Ward, 2017) Treating victims of crime entails a completely different approach because the objective is to facilitate the victim in developing beneficial habits that help them cope with the adverse circumstances and to diminish the effects of their trauma (APA, 2011). Trauma can illicit very adverse behaviors such as criminality, suicidal ideation, and major depression, so providing effective and ethical treatment to the victims of crime is essential for them to heal and be able to lead a somewhat normal life. A victim that is subjected to criminal trauma can develop intricate struggles in areas like adaptation, detachment, character growth, interpersonal capacities, and corporeal stress. In America, 89.7% of people over 18 years old have been subjected to, at a minimum, one DSM-5 Criterion A traumatic occurrence, with countless adults having been subjected to two or more Criterion A trauma (Ward, 2017). For a forensic clinician to provide the most ethical treatment feasible, they must know and comprehend the applicable parameters concerning multifaceted trauma and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) when they are constructing a treatment approach for a victim of a crime (Ward, 2017). Additionally, when assessing a victim of crime, the clinician must be cognizant of in what manner that victim's cultural upbringing is affected by, and affects, their involvement in the traumatic events and their exchanges with the criminal justice system. When treating a victim of crime is imperative for the clinician to be mindful of how traumatic and venerable it can be for the victim to disclose information about their experience to a relative stranger. Revealing this information can be exhausting and overwhelming for the victim, so offering regular breaks and being aware of how the victim is answering the inquiries, as in are they still present and amiable to continue talking or are they becoming more evasive and uninterested (Ward, 2017). Ultimately, it is vital for all

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

16 people involved in the criminal justice system to remember that victims must be regarded with empathy and regard for their dignity, that they be authorized to utilize the judicial processes, and to quick recompense, as stated by nationwide legislation, for the impairment they have endured. The clinician treating victims of crime should apprise the victim of their part and the extent, timing, and evolution of the legal system, and of the nature of their cases, especially in cases where the crimes were more violent and grave. By employing methods that will lessen the victim’s imposition, safeguard their privacy, and guarantee their and their families and witnesses’ safety from threats and/or retribution (Ward, 2017). Ethical Guidelines Forensic psychologists are obliged to adapt their conduct to the APA Ethics Code, which was recently revised in 2017 (APA, 2017), and even though the APA Ethics Code pertains to all psychologic disciplines, including forensic psychology, specific segments of the code may not be applicable for forensic practice in general, but especially for a forensic evaluation that involves multifaceted trauma. The Code is intended to enchiridion and to encourage psychologists towards the utmost ethical standards of the discipline (APA, 2017). The APA general principles are not designed to be a requirement necessarily, but to offer a general framework for ethical conduct. However, the second part of the Code does consist of detailed standards for ethical conduct which are enforceable conventions for conduct as psychologists (APA, 2017). Forensic psychologists can also access the APA Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Practice (APA, 2013). The Guidelines state that the objectives of the Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology are to advance the excellence of forensic psychological facilities; augment how forensic psychologists’ practice; inspire an elevated level of excellence in proficient practices; and to inspire forensic clinicians to recognize and respect the rights of the persons they help (APA,

17 2017). In addition to the APA Ethics Code and Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology, forensic psychologists should also contemplate the material, advice, and ideals that have been established, implemented, or sanctioned by scientific and expert organizations within their fields of concentration (Rocchio, 2020). Federal Laws Comparing and contrasting Federal laws for violent offenders, non-violent offenders, and victims is impossible simply due to the nature of their involvement and treatment with a forensic clinician. A violent offender will have Federal Laws that pertain to keeping the perpetrator from reoffending and protecting society, whereas a non-violent offender’s treatment more frequently involves SUD and punishing them with incarceration may prove to be more detrimental them rehabilitative. However, victims of crime are categorized much differently because their treatment plan does not include rehabilitation for violent behaviors or sobriety but recovery from their trauma, recompense, and maintaining some semblance of normalcy. Federal regulations for violent offenders encompass a psychologic treatment plan which includes the regulations from the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), such as federal regulation 6010.03 that concerns psychiatric evaluation and treatment of inmates, with subsets like purpose and extent, which defines measures for voluntary and involuntary psychiatric assessment, institutionalization, and corporal and psychological care, in an appropriate facility (BOP, 2023). These processes are permitted by statute § 4042, with a subsection that applies to prisoners in Bureau custody, as defined as entirety of people in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP, 2023). Since 2021, the Bureau has been in authority over roughly 131,040 prisoners, in 122 prisons and statistics show that BOP prisoners with serious mental disorder(s) were in prison for violent offenses, such as sex crimes, burglary, murder, and/or aggravated violent attack at

18 approximately twice the percentage of prisoners exclusive of serious mental health disorders (BOP, 2023). In May 2014, the Treatment and Care of Inmates with Mental Illness law 5310.16, which states that if a prisoner is classified as having a serious mental health disorder, the prison is required to consider the inmates diagnoses, the gravity and extent of their symptomologies, the gradation of functional diminishing connected to their disorder, their treatment record, and their present treatment requirements. In conjunction with federal regulation 6010.03, is federal subset § 549.42, which is the utilization of psychotropic medications on mentally ill offenders, which states that psychotropic medications will be utilized solely for the treatment of diagnosed mental diseases and syndromes, and their symptomologies, where psychotropic medication is a recognized treatment. Furthermore, psychotropic medication will be dispensed once the appropriate procedures are followed (BOP, 2023). Psychotropic medication is largely not proposed for, and should not be employed as, a scheme of chemical management of conducts not linked to mental disorders. Psychotropic medication must also only be prescribed by a clinician explicitly for mood-altering, mind-altering, or impulse control objectives (BOP, 2023). In 1989, Miami-Dade County was the first place to implement a Felony Drug Court, which involves Drug Treatment Court (DTC) in the county and the Floridian Eleventh Judicial Circuit court commenced hearing cases. Senjo and Leip (2001) state that the theory being that most drug related crimes are non-violent in nature and thus the offender will not benefit from being incarcerated but would if they received substance abuse treatment. This innovative court approach became known for its pioneering techniques and highlighting of collaboration, which means that there was a partnership amongst the adjudicators, state prosecutors, and public defenders that specialized in drug cases to create an architype for DTCs (NDCRC, 2023). This led to the utilizing of the theory of therapeutic jurisprudence (TTJ), which developed into the

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

19 future for DTCs. The DTC is founded on the theory that substance dependence is a disorder that promotes criminality; thus, DTCs are greatly treatment-orientated and sympathetic of the defendants' recovery energies. The defendants are not charged or penalized for their substance use challenges, rather, the DTC offers drug treatments and other resources that support the defendant in accomplishing sobriety and stability in their lives. Statistics revealed that DTC defendants in Florida's First Judicial Court had reduced recidivism rates the longer they remained in the program (Senjo & Leip, 2001). The DTC platform highlighted the significance in retention for subclasses like younger adults, females who partake in more than one addictive substance and have a history of being sexually exploited, and persons with comorbid psychiatric conditions. In a study that conducted a 30-month follow-up of graduates of the two DTCs, it was found that they had decreased recidivism and substance abuse and had an increased probability of being working when compared to defendants that did not graduate from the DTC or a corresponding comparison grouping of parolees (Senjo & Leip, 2001). The proliferation of DTCs hs been extensive, in 2012 the U.S. had at least 1,300 state drug courts operating, and that number increased to at least 2,000 by 2015 (USSC, 2017). The Attorney General Guidelines for Victim and Witness Assistance (AG Guidelines) was enacted to create rules to be adhered to by law enforcement and personnel of the U.S. Department of Justice (Department) investigations, prosecutions, corrections, and parole mechanisms in the treatment of victims of, and witnesses to, crime. In 1982, Congress required the Attorney General to disseminate the first AG Guidelines, which are revised intermittently to echo deviations in the law (Rose, 2022). These guidelines required staff within the department to have a shared obligation to safeguard the privacy of the victim and eyewitnesses, which includes their personally identifiable information (PII) and other restricted data. This obligation is aligned

20 with the victim’s right to be treated with fairly, respectfully, with dignity, and privacy, which are general human rights and should be implemented in all exchanges with victims (Rose, 2022). Even though the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA), necessitates that states or other government organizations should assume all the out-of-pocket expenses for the basics required for a sexual assault medical forensic examination, many clinicians consider these exams to comprise of forensic and medical fundamentals, like providing and gathering information, treatment protocols, and recommendations to community resources, for sexually transmissible disease contagions, gravidness, suicidal ideation, SUDs, and additional nonacute health worries, and follow-up as required to offer supplementary medicinal and psychological treatment (Rose, 2022). Supreme Court Cases The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the ultimate court of law in the Country, it is open to adjudge all litigations and disputes ascending under the Constitution or the laws of America. The SCOTUS is the last arbitrator of the law, the SCOTUS is responsible for assuring the American populace the vow of equal justice under law and, thus, also operates as sentinel and interpreter of the Constitution. Contained by the scheme of litigation, SCOTUS indicates the extent of authority betwixt state and country, state and state, and government and national (SCOTUS, 2023). The probability of a case being heard by SCOTUS is slight, but the cases that do get heard are generally extremely significant. The case of Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U.S. 346 (1997), concerned whether imprisoned sexual perpetrators that have a mental syndrome or additional psychological syndromes, increases the probability they will reoffend and can be court ordered to civil commitment and continuing treatment (SCOTUS, 1997). The sex offender, Hendricks, served numerous periods of

21 imprisonment, yet repeated molested children when he was released and for an extended epoch. At one point he was found guilty of molesting two adolescent boys and was going to be released after spending 10 years in prison. Around the time Hendricks was to be released, the state legislature wanted to remedy the issue of re-offense by sex offenders, and they passed the Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA) (SCOTUS, 1997). Centered on SVPA, the state requested Hendricks be civilly committed when he was released from prison. Hendricks did not contest his diagnosis of pedophilia or debate that it was correctable, which resulted in the jury finding, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he was a sexually violent predator, nonetheless, Hendricks did succeed in obtaining a constitutional challenge to the SVPA in the Kansas Supreme Court (KSC). However, the KSC found that there was no infringement of applicable due process in this case since states have the authority to use force to control a citizen that poses a danger to persons around them because they are incapable of controlling their actions (SCOTUS, 1997). Another key aspect of the ruling is that the SVPA does not create a double jeopardy concern as it does not enforce penitentiary sentences and does not have a disciplinary objective correlated with reprisal or restriction; rather, it is focused on treatment and restricted to civil commitment. The dearth of a mental state requisite is permitted because it is centered on persons with mental deviations, instead of individuals who are aware of their conduct. The KSC found that pedophilia does qualify as a psychological abnormality under the SVPA, the court ordered him committed, indefinitely. Hendricks appealed his case to SCOTUS and the Court ruled, in a 5–4 determination, opposing Hendricks (SCOTUS, 1997). SCOTUS concurred the SVPA's measures, its description of a mental abnormality, and that the SVPA restricts individuals qualified for commitment to anyone that not able to constrain their violent behaviors.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

22 Additionally, SCOTUS agreed the SVPA is not in violation of the Constitution's double jeopardy embargo or the prohibition on ex post facto law since the SVPA does not begin criminal trials, this involuntary confinement under it is not penalization; since the SVPA is civil, Hendricks' detention under the SVPA is not an additional prosecution and not double jeopardy. Finally, the Court said the SVPA is not deemed disciplinary if it cannot provide treatment for an untreatable disorder (SCOTUS, 1997). The court found that precautionary continuing detention of people with severe psychologic has formerly been acceptable based on if a person’s adverse behaviors cannot be prohibited, and the detention does not infringe upon their rights to detain them to prevent antisocial actions. Nevertheless, it has also been claimed that continuation the SVPA increases involuntary civil commitment to persons with personality disorders, which conceivably permits for the commitment of greater numbers of offenders if there is evidence of the probability of re-offending (SCOTUS, 1997). Plus, if the prerequisite of dangerousness is not restricted to persons with a mental syndrome, and if mental abnormality, instead of just mental disease, can be the foundation for sex offender commitment, there is a risk that it could extend the base for traditional civil commitment to personality disorders too. SCOTUS is given roughly 7,000 case hearing petitions yearly but only agrees to hear 80, and in some cases, there is a finding that concerns how to treat SUDs (SCOTUS, 1962). When the SCOTUS receives a drug-entangled case, it generally connects to a criminal situation. SCOTUS solely judges on the law; its judgements are rules that can be utilized with corresponding situations and cases across the nation. For instance, Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660, is based on a California statute that made being a narcotic addict a misdemeanor, which can result in incarceration. Hence, California courts then surmised the statute as rendering the condition of narcotic addiction a crime, and the addict could be arraigned. Further, the statute

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

23 averred the offender can be arraigned at any point, albeit the offender did not use or possess any narcotics in the state and was not charged with any antisocial actions (SCOTUS, 1962). The California statute was seen as taking away a person’s basic human rights and it was brought before the SCOTUS, Robison v. California, where they decided that California cannot incarcerate an individual exclusively for being a narcotic addict (SCOTUS, 1962). Since 1962, comprehension of addiction has advanced and it is now understood that addiction is a treatable disorder and that all people have the potential to have a SUD, not just poor sociodemographic populaces. Unlike the other target populations previously discussed, SCOTUS, has not been as effective with rulings that facilitate how to treat the victim of crime populace and how to establish intercessions to avert violence against women, and how clinicians need to create treatments that work within the confines of these decisions. Even though the law has the potential to be a great means in minimizing the threat of violence against women, it can likewise be a barrier to intercessions. As government representatives, district attorneys, and Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) and Domestic Violence (DV) advocates administrate legal intercessions in response to violence against women, the SCOTUS has gradually been called upon more to infer these laws and evaluate their constitutionality (Rutkow et al., 2009). The law has the potential to be one of the most formidable implements to impact this threat of violence against women. In 2000, SCOTUS heard the case United States v. Morrison, the main topic was if Congress had the constitutional power to sanction the portion of the VAWA, that bestowed victims of gender-driven violent offenses, the right to generate a civil litigation against the perpetrator in Federal court (Rutkow et al., 2009). SCOTUS was averse to deliberate the collective impact on commerce of the numerous specific acts of gender-driven violent behavior,

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

24 and it was similarly worried that if Congress can control gender-driven violent behavior, it would result in limited restrictions on Federal authority to regulate additional criminal issues that are customarily left to the States. In 2005, SCOTUS heard the case Castle Rock v. Gonzales, where they overruled the 10th Circuit's verdict to permit the receiver of a restraining order, Gonzales, to ensue with a litigation that maintained the town of Castle Rock had infringed upon her 14th amendment rights when the town failed to impose the property interest she detained in the implementation of the restraining order against her ex-husband. SCOTUS asserted that Gonzales did not have secure property rights in the implementation of the restraining order (Rutkow et al., 2009). In 2006, SCOTUS heard Davis v. Washington, where they deliberated if evidence furnished in a 911 call by a IPV or DV and the victim's statements while being interviewed by law enforcement can be utilized as evidence albeit they did not provide testimony at trial. SCOTUS judged that victim information in the 911 call can be utilized as evidence, however, they affirmed that information obtained in the interview with law enforcement was not admissible (Rutkow et al., 2009). Rutkow and colleagues (2009) posit that distinct from United States v. Morrison and Castle Rock v. Gonzales, the more recent Davis v. Washington outcome did not include a dialogue of judicial authority or intention. Rather, Davis v. Washington justified a woman’s right to be safe, especially when she perceives herself as being too intimidated to provide testimony at her abuser’s trial. The Davis v. Washington ruling created a consistent regulation for the nation concerning the permissibility of 911 calls, and had the Court decided that a 911 recording could not be employed to connect the abuser to the victim when a victim was unable to be at the trial, SCOTUS would have basically rewarded the abuser for the very terrorization that is commonly at the core of IPV and/or DV. Several women’s advocacy groups, including the National

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

25 Network to End Domestic Violence, the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project, and the Women’s Advocacy Project amalgamated a brief to assist the Court to understand the vitalness of 911 calls in obtaining criminal convictions. For instance, federal and/or state regulations decide when a woman can acquire orders of protection, enact criminal or civil accountability for IPV, and inhibit abusers’ access to firearms (Rutkow et al., 2009). By recognizing the realistic consequences of cases such as United States v. Morrison (2000), Castle Rock v. Gonzales (2005), and Davis v. Washington (2006), activists can have improved comprehension of the legal boundaries that SCOTUS has compelled, clinicians treating victims of IPV or DV can modify their personal treatments and actions appropriately, for instance they can initiate lawsuits intended to contest laws that are prejudicial or identified as putting women in danger for impending violence, and establish intercessions and treatments consistent with the Supreme Court’s rulings (Rutkow et al., 2009). Aftercare Plans The term aftercare is not synonymous with the adult correctional system, even though many corrections specialists have identified aftercare as a significant element when reintegrating recently freed misfeasors into society. Frequently, misfeasors are released into society with only a ticket for low-cost transportation, like a greyhound bus, and a minute amount of money. This results in the misfeasor not being able to establish stable residence, employment, and support once they are back in society and often leads to their recidivism. The concept of aftercare is more commonly used in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, where it relates to rehabilitative creeds and the thought that established treatment intercessions are not likely to transform misfeasors except if they are joined with community-based treatment and supports (Cannonier et al., 2021). However, aftercare plans are becoming increasingly utilized within the correctional

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

26 system with violent misfeasors being released on parole because appropriate aftercare plans have empirically been proven to reduce violent offender recidivism when the misfeasor adheres to it (Dickson, Polaschek, & Casey, 2013). This has led to the realization that making an aftercare plan before the misfeasor is released can facilitate a smoother transition into the community, which also includes the community having the resources essential to meet their specific treatment requirements. There is a third sector within the correctional system that also utilizes aftercare plans and that is the victims of crimes. Swaim (2022) posits that regardless the type of crime the victim endured, violent or non-violent, they experienced a traumatic event and will have residual trauma, such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and anxiety, that must be addressed for them to restore their personal stability and achieve long-lasting recovery. Trauma is largely multifaceted, and hence involves complicated diligences towards quick treatment response by law enforcement, medical personnel, mental health specialists, this includes an amalgamation of approaches and procedures that are required to attain appropriate treatment and then sustain their trauma recovery by implementing a specific aftercare plan based on their personal trauma experiences and post treatment needs (Swaim, 2022). It is important to note that all efforts made by the correctional system to release misfeasors back into society, which includes an offender’s aftercare planning, must consider the communities protection and misfeasor rehabilitation goals, even with the motive primarily being to reduce the prison populace, the general public’s wellbeing must be taken into consideration. By and large, research outcomes regarding the efficaciousness of implementing aftercare plans are significant since they demonstrate that when aftercare plans are created, they help to ease the

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

27 newly released misfeasors transition back into society, which not only reduces prison populaces but it also facilities a reduction in recidivism. Aftercare Plan: Non-Violent Offenders As noted above, the non-violent offender is committing a crime, however, their intention is not to cause harm to any person, rather they are focused on a particular objective, e.g., purse snatchers, drug and alcohol crimes, and white-collar crimes. In 2021. America had roughly 525,000 misdemeanor arrests made, and the highest rates of misdemeanor arrests were for drug and alcohol related crimes. Approximately one in four, 25.3%, of misdemeanor arrests were for drug crimes, 20.1% were for driving under the influence and battery/assault, and 7% were attributed to alcohol-related crimes (Albalawi et al., 2019). Using illicit drugs raises the probability of prolonged participation in illegal actions because many of the offenders have developed a substance use disorder (SUD), which causes impaired thinking and an innate need to continue using, resulting in higher occurrences recidivism and relapses. Numerous precursive inmates go back to jail, and eventually prison as their criminality escalates, after being released because they lacked the appropriate support systems necessitated to facilitate them effectively reintegrating back into society. In an effort to decrease recidivism, a new law, frequently denoted as Proposition 36, mandates judiciary officers to proffer nonviolent drug defendants' probation with substance abuse treatment, in place of detention for their first two violations (Cannonier et al., 2021). The judge can select from a list of approved treatment programs, and a segment of the defendant’s sentence could order community service, literacy training, family counseling and vocational training. In 1989, drug treatment courts (DTC) were created as community-grounded options instead of imprisonment for offenders who have drug dependency and SUD (Ruiz et al., 2019).

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

28 Most DTCs follow a universal group of doctrines based on entry into a residential program and emphasizing SUD recovery as an indication to offender rehabilitation. The drug court scheme has been extended and modified to adapt to the demands of several specific populaces, like offenders with alcohol-related concerns, minors, or individuals being released into their community after graduating from a residential substance abuse treatment program. The concept of aftercare in the criminal justice system is employed largely to incorporate phases of superintendence and/or support of offenders after being released from imprisonment, juvenile detention, and DTC programs, etc. (Ruiz et al., 2019). These supports could incorporate one or more requirements from employment reeducation, literacy classes, to a longer duration in an outpatient substance abuse treatment program. Remaining longer in a community aftercare program has been documented as an augmentation to recovery outcomes for SUD populaces in prison and community superintendence situations, in addition to proffering a means to decrease the probabilities of recidivism (Ruiz et al., 2019). Aftercare programs provide offenders reentering society incarceration or proffered residential treatment programs with material support, informatory resources, referrals, and assistance concerning becoming employed, housing, and additional services. Ruiz and colleagues (2019) posit that it should be noted that the concept of aftercare is not frequently utilized in the adult criminal justice system because it is more commonly used in the SUD treatment extent. In the SUD treatment context aftercare has been related to rehabilitative beliefs and the credence that correctional treatment intercessions are doubtful to alter offenders’ behaviors if they are not combined with community-founded treatment. For instance, SUD treatment clinicians think that maintaining the offender’s treatment while they are preparing to be released, and eventually returning to their communities, in conjunction with an extensive period of superintendence

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

29 within their community, is an essential factor of an efficacious treatment program (Ruiz et al., 2019). Furthermore, it was realized that creating a plan for the transition of offender’s returning to their community must be performed early in the transition process, to ensure their community can provide the resources and services needed to meet their specific treatment requirements; deprived of aftercare in their community, the efficacy of in-custody treatment lessens rapidly. SUD aftercare programs that are used by judiciaries can have a significant part in facilitating that their clients are on a route to healthful reentry into their communities. Ruiz and colleagues (2019) posit that even with some drug court partakers feeling they were forced into SUD treatment, research indicates that what makes a difference might not be the precise extent of sentence, but instead the apparent harshness of penalties for failing. Essentially, dug court offenders who perceive they have more legal burden are more inclined to stay in treatment for extended periods. Nevertheless, the unequal intimidation of penalty might not be the single deviation for this non-violent, SUD populace because it is important to be cognizant of the offender’s likelihood of rehabilitation because there may be supplementary variables that attribute to the offenders relapse a recidivism probability (Ruiz et al., 2019). For example, the duration of an offender’s record of past substance abuse criminality, the substance being misused, gauging of internal motivation/readiness, plus how many times the offender has attempted to be rehabilitated before, could all impact the course of individual offenders’ success. An appropriate aftercare plan for non-violent offenders would include service objectives just as complying with medical or psychological recommended treatments; staying sober and showing their capability to live free from alcohol or drug dependance; complying with all compulsory drug tests; complying with all of the courts orders; and participating in individual psychotherapy to decide on, and/or upsurge, specific treatment requirements, which can include

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

30 parenting classes and life management skills (Ruiz et al., 2019). These treatment requirements are essential to alter individual conducts that place the offender and their families at risk. The offender will participate in an Alcohol and Other Drug Preliminary Assessment (AOPDA), which will determine what substance abuse treatment services the offender needs to participate in. This can include being referred to inpatient or outpatient substance abuse treatment at an agency approved by the Courts. Upon successful completion of the treatment program, the staff will recommend an aftercare and relapse prevention plan that the offender must adhere to (Ruiz et al., 2019). This could include participating in an aftercare program, finding a sponsor, attending Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) or Narcotics Anonymous (NA) meetings and continuing to submit to random drug testing as required by the drug testing agency. Compliance will be constructed on the offender's active partaking and acquiescence with the program policies, and capacity to continue being drug and alcohol free, plus they must abstain from the usage of alcohol, controlled substances, or any additional inebriants connected with their use, unless legitimately prescribed for them by an accredited doctor or dentist. Failing or refusing to submit to a random drug and alcohol test when asked for will be considered a positive result and be indicatory of present drug usage and conveyed to the Court as the offender being in non- compliance, which can result in the offender being returned to custody. Aftercare Plan: Violent Offenders In 2015, there were over 10 million individuals incarcerated across the globe, and about 2.2 million of those inmates were in America (Dickson, Polaschek, & Casey, 2013). Even though other nations have conveyed reductions in violent crimes recidivism rates continue to be elevated in this country, with data from 2005 through 2010, showing more than one-third of inmates released from prison were convicted of a new offense within 2 years (Dickson, Polaschek, &

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

31 Casey, 2013). Many release strategies, or aftercare plans, are created to decrease re-offense and are based on social and psychological intercessions, however, their effect ranges are inadequate. Psychologic conditions and SUDs both heighten re-offense probabilities and are seen in excessive numbers amongst penitentiary populaces, the comorbidity of these conditions can result in increased violent behaviors (Dickson, Polaschek, & Casey, 2013). For this populace, the treatment needs often include being prescribed applicable psychotropic prescriptions, which are incorporated into the inmate’s release/aftercare plan to decrease recidivism. Research has conducted randomized clinical and observational experiments, which have proven that there are correlations betwixt being prescribed psychotropic treatment regimens and decreases in violent criminality (Dickson, Polaschek, & Casey, 2013). There are also studies that have demonstrated that specific psychotic symptomologies and untreated schizophrenics are linked with elevated re- offense possibilities. Also, existing research reveals a substantial association betwixt wrongful conduct in the prison setting and violent behavior after being released. Research has demonstrated that out of all the inmates who are committed to abstain from criminality upon release, it is the violent offenders who are deemed at a higher risk for reoffending closely after they are released from imprisonment. Dickson, Polaschek, and Casey (2013) theorize that a reason could be a dearth of creating a release/aftercare plan for their release. Current study with child-sex criminals has confirmed that males who circumvented reoffending had established a release plan for how they would live while on parole, which was created preceding their release, however, the release plans that were more detailed also contributed significantly to the gradual validity of the forecast of recidivism after monitoring for both inert and self-motivated gauges of risk. Recidivisms frequently transpire shortly after the inmate is released, signifying that neither inmates nor their societies are sufficiently equipped for

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

32 their return; this inadequacy makes it tough for probationers to continue practicing the progresses they learned through rehabilitation into their post-imprisonment daily life. High-risk probationers, who often have a history of violent behavior, are deemed a populace with great vulnerability within their communities because these persons are more prone to suffer from SUDs, psychological and bodily ailments, no practical opportunities to find monetary support for themselves, and limited prosocial resources are available for them. Frequently they reenter into equally unstable, crime-filled, disadvantaged, and poor communities, which makes enduring the initial period of parole, under these conditions, a formidable undertaking (Dickson, Polaschek, & Casey, 2013). For the last two decades research has focused on classifying and practicing stratagems for handling extremely risky circumstances, founded on the Relapse Prevention Model (RPM), which is a psychologically constructed rehabilitation program that recognizes that supporting probationers, especially those newly released, with the most important facets of their daily life is a crucial step in decreasing post release reoffending (Dickson, Polaschek, & Casey, 2013). Establishing an aftercare plan, which is called release plan for inmates, prior to the inmate’s release includes concentrating on essential subsistence matters like where will the offender reside and finding gainful employment, is amalgamated into a comprehensive approach for successfully rehabilitating inmate’s as they are nearer their parole and while on probation. Creating the release plan with the inmate is a critical part of ensuring the plan is based on the individual needs of that inmate. Dickson, Polaschek, and Casey (2013) posit that a release plan for a child sexual predator will include not living specific distances from schools, whereas, an inmate who physically and sexually assaulted their wife, should not go around their victim but could live near a school. Previous study on variances betwixt persons that do and those who do not reoffend

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

33 indicates that suitable housing, employ, and monetary resources, in conjunction with reliable and supportive emotive provisions, and avoiding using illicit substances and/or legal ones like marijuana or alcohol, not associating with felonious peers, are some of the significant subjects to be addressed. This research demonstrates that males that commit violent crimes who had higher predication release plans had decreased amounts of recidivism and were less probable to go back to prison within a few months being paroled (Dickson, Polaschek, & Casey, 2013). Individuals imprisoned for violent crimes, which includes sex crimes, often encounter numerous barriers to effective community reentry, many states have laws, like Jessica’s Law, that prohibits sex offenders from living within a quantified distance from anywhere children assemble, therefore diminishing the accessibility of housing selections (Dickson, Polaschek, & Casey, 2013). Another consideration to the barriers that sexual offenders encounter surpasses finding a residence and gainful employment but could be significantly more extensive and challenging to avoid, which is that the community where the offender returns to, normally these populaces are not welcoming to any sexual offender; there is an incredibly low lenience for reoffending amid most members of any community, which results in increased discrimination against this group while delivering services to them (La Vigne et al., 2008). To bypass these obstacles while developing the sex offenders release plan it is important to know what support options are available. For instance, Kansas has implemented the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) program, which designates a skilled mentor from the sex offender’s community to facilitate the move from pre-release to post-release; in New York, corrections work with therapists who offer psychotherapy betwixt newly released inmates with a record of grave and violent crimes and their familial members preceding their release (La Vigne et al., 2008).

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

34 The primary goal of a release plan for a sex offender is to decrease an offender’s probability of reoffending in their community. This sex offenders release plan will include them entering a treatment program as they are closer to being paroled to aid in the change from being incarcerated to residing in the community; the offender will have a reintegration coordinator assigned who will oversee the establishment of a release plan and communicates betwixt the offender, his designated support system, and community organizations (La Vigne et al., 2008). While the sex offender is participating in the prison treatment program, reintegration coordinator will continue discussing, refining, and detailing their release plan and submitting that information to the Parole Board or probation agency as the offender’s reentry into their community draws nearer. The release plan will also include specific requirements of release, which will include living at an authorized residence, consistent meetings with their probation officer, who will work with the inmate to become familiarized with public transit, including where its located, how to access the schedules and routes, and the cost (La Vigne et al., 2008). The reintegration coordinator will provide the inmate with a list of resources from which to obtain inexpensive clothing prior to release and assist them in acquiring human assistance benefits in their community. Part of the release plan will also include the reintegration coordinator and the inmate creating a support network that the inmate can rely on for support, which includes family or friends that have a history of positive influence and behaviors, member of their spiritual community, attending sex offense recovery groups, attending counseling as recommended by the offender’s post treatment case plan, registering as a sex offender, and abiding by local laws (La Vigne et al., 2008). If the sex offender does not follow and is caught disregarding their release plan, then their probation will be revoked, and they will return to being incarcerated.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

35 Aftercare Plan: Trauma Victims Sexual violence is a prevalent and destructive crisis in America, with females, particularly those in college or working as prostitutes, are at a predominantly higher danger for being victims of sexual abuse (Swaim, 2022). The reactions to being sexually assaulted and the adverse implications are immeasurable, even with bodily and psychological treatment, occurrences of PTSD) and other mental illnesses are elevated, affects at a minimum one third of all victims of sexual violence. Per the National Sexual Violence Resource Center (NSVRC) (2015), sexual violence is described as a person being forced into sexual activity without agreeing or consenting to the act and sexual violence is not restricted to involuntary intercourse or oral, vaginal, or rectal assault; it is also uninvited sexual interaction, unsolicited sexual groping, sexual harassment, and sexual victimizing for the offender’s personal gain. Swaim (2022) posits that prompt intercession via psychotherapy, having information for resources, and promoting associations to other survivors of violent crimes, are crucial to assisting a victim of sexual violence to heal from the impacts of their trauma. Furthermore, the significance of aiding victims to obtain elucidation regarding the descriptions of trauma and sexual violence, plus the universal responses to trauma cannot be minimalized because a substantial amount of research demonstrates that efficacious treatment can result in long-term rehabilitation from PTSD. It is important for clinicians and victims to know the definition of trauma, which is an individual’s emotive reaction to an event that results in that person feeling portended, scared, and helpless. There also is no established level of how adverse the experience must be to cause trauma; a traumatic incident can include a near death experience, or more multifaceted, enduring, and recurrent, such as neglect or sexual abuse (Swaim, 2022). It is also important to note that trauma can be caused by adverse behaviors that can include bodily or emotional impairment, and

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

36 that trauma can include impairments that are not physically apparent, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which can persist for a long time and potentially causing the victim many challenges to their daily existence (Swaim, 2022). Experiencing trauma can question the victims perceptions of how the world operates and who they are as an individual, which has an undulating consequence on all aspects of their life, from their strategies for accomplishing their dreams, the victim may stop going to school or work, to their corporeal health, where the victim may develop physical ailments like migraines or stomach ulcers and they do not have a connection with their own body (Swaim, 2022). Recovering from such a traumatic experience(s) takes different amounts of time for each victim, and profound healing frequently is a long process, and trauma healing isn’t usually upbeat or straightforward because the victim’s journey can encompass impediments, diversions, and adjournments, together with obstructions and regression (Swaim, 2022). The victim’s aftercare plan is called a trauma recovery plan and the first part is to finish a Ripple Effect Wheel REW, this includes identifying the victim’s individual posttraumatic impacts, which may comprise of choosing from the list of short- and long-span symptomologies utilizing the Healing Wheel (HW), which is employed for creating a more personalized trauma recovery strategy (Murn & Schultz, 2022). The HW is equally a quantifiable and self-aid device that proffers related recommendations for self-care coping stratagems and trauma-informed treatment processes; for instance, teaching coping skills, relaxation techniques, confidence exercises, and cognitive rearrangement all have displayed positive results in treating sexual violence victims and are intertwined all through the Healing Wheel. Murn and Schultz (2022) state that the trauma recovery plan will include mindfulness stratagems, limbic system treatments, and augmenting societal networks, together with providing for rudimentary needs,

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

37 engaging in responsibilities of normal life, e.g., school or work, establishing physically safe milieus, objective-setting, and to stop avoiding living life by learning to be wholly, and vigorously working through the traumatic reminiscences to understand the pointlessness of the crime and acquire some meaning to the event, joining support groups, and ongoing therapeutic post-trauma treatment with clinical therapist. Although a victims trauma recovery plan cannot be forced into compliance it is extremely recommended and it is empirically proven that victims affected by sexual violence have a superior probability of reestablishing stability and attaining lifelong recovery when they follow their trauma recovery plan (Murn & Schultz, 2022).

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

38 References Albalawi, O., Chowdhury, N., Wand, H., Allnutt, S., Greenberg, D., Adily, A., . . . Butler, T. (2019). Court diversion for those with psychosis and its impact on re-offending rates: Results from a longitudinal data-linkage study. BJPsych Open, 5 (1), E9. doi:10.1192/bjo.2018.71 APA. (2017). American Psychological Association: ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychological Association . https://www.apa.org/ethics/code/ethics- code-2017.pdf Belenko, S., Hiller, M., & Hamilton, L. (2013). Treating substance use disorders in the criminal justice system. Current psychiatry reports, 15 (11), 414. doi.org/10.1007/s11920-013- 0414-z Bisset, C. (2018). Understanding childhood adversity, resilience, and crime. Children and Families; Law and Order . doi.org/ISBN 9781788518864 BOP. (2023). Medical, dental, and health policy. Federal Bureau of Prisons . https://www.bop.gov/ Cannonier, C., Galloway Burke, M., & Mitchell, E. (2021). The impact of a reentry and aftercare program on recidivism. The Review of Black Political Economy, 48 (1), 93–122. doi.org/10.1177/0034644620973931 CDC. (2023, June 29). Adverse childhood experiences (aces). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/aces/index.html

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

39 Dickson, S., Polaschek, D. L., & Casey, A. (2013). Can the quality of high-risk violent prisoners’ release plans predict recidivism following intensive rehabilitation? A comparison with risk assessment instruments. Psychology, Crime & Law, 19 (4), 371–389. doi- org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1080/1068316X.2011.640634 Glaser, B. (2009). Treaters or punishers? The ethical role of mental health clinicians in sex offender programs. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14 (4), 248–255. doi- org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1016/j.avb.2009.04.007 Greenwald, R., & Camden, A. A. (2022). A pragmatic randomized comparison of intensive EMDR and intensive PC for victims of crime. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy . doi-org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1037/tra0001176.supp (Supplemental) Gilmore, A., Leone, R., Hahn, C., Oesterle, D. & Davidson, T. (2021). Barriers to Accessing Mental Health Care After a Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examination. Journal of Forensic Nursing , 17 (2), 84-92. doi-org.10.1097/JFN.0000000000000321. Hilton, N. Z., & Radatz, D. L. (2018). The criminogenic and noncriminogenic treatment needs of intimate partner violence offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy & Comparative Criminology, 62 (11), 3247–3259. doi-org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1177/0306624X17740015 Kingston, D. A., Olver, M. E., McDonald, J., & Cameron, C. (2018). A randomized controlled trial of a cognitive skills program for offenders with mental illness. Criminal Behaviour & Mental Health, 28 (4), 369–382. doi-org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1002/cbm.2077

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

40 La Vigne, N., Davies, E., Palmer, T., & Halberstadt, R. (2008). Release planning for successful reentry a guide for corrections, service providers, and community groups. Urban Institute: Justice Policy Center . doi.org/10.1037/e719382011-001 Leymon, M. G., Campbell, C. M., Henning, K., & Renauer, B. C. (2022). The impacts of length of prison stay on recidivism of non-violent offenders in Oregon. Journal of Criminal Justice, 82. doi-org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2022.102002 Murn, L. T., & Schultz, L. C. (2022). Healing the Ripple Effect of Sexual Violence. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 36 (3), 310–330. doi-org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1080/87568225.2020.1819925 National Drug Court Resource Center. (2023, January 27). What are drug courts? National Drug Court Resource Center . https://ndcrc.org/what-are-drug-courts/ National Sexual Violence Resource Center. (2015). Survivors. National Sexual Violence Resource Center . https://www.nsvrc.org/ Papalia, N., Spivak, B., Daffern, M., & Ogloff, J. R. P. (2019). A meta‐analytic review of the efficacy of psychological treatments for violent offenders in correctional and forensic mental health settings. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 26 (2). doi- org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1111/cpsp.12282 Rocchio L. M. (2020). Ethical and professional considerations in the forensic assessment of complex trauma and dissociation. Psychological injury and law, 13 (2), 124–134. doi.org/10.1007/s12207-020-09384-9

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

41 Rose, K. (2022). Attorney general guidelines for victim and Witness Assistance, 2022 edition: OVC. Office for Victims of Crime . https://ovc.ojp.gov/library/publications/attorney- general-guidelines-victim-and-witness-assistance-2022-edition Ruiz, B., Ulibarrí, B. J., Lomelí, A. S., Guerra, R. S., & Longoria, R. R. (2019). The Relative Influence of Legal Pressure on Outcomes in a Rehabilitation Aftercare Drug Court. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 44 (5), 727–745. doi-org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1007/s12103-018-9465-3 Rutkow, L., Vernick, J. S., Webster, D. W., & Lennig, D. J. (2009). Violence against women and the U.S. Supreme Court: Recent challenges and opportunities for advocates and practitioners. Violence Against Women, 15 (10), 1248–1258. doi.org/10.1177/1077801209344342 Senjo, S., & Leip, L. A. (2001). Testing therapeutic jurisprudence theory: An empirical assessment of the drug court process. The Western Criminology Review, 3 (1). SCOTUS. (1962). Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962). Justia Law . https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/370/660/ SCOTUS. (1997). Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U.S. 346 (1997). Justia Law . https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/521/346/ SCOTUS. (2023). Supreme Court of the United States. Supreme Court of the United States. https://www.supremecourt.gov/ Swaim, E. (2022, May 25). 7 things to remember on your trauma recovery journey. Healthline. https://www.healthline.com/health/mental-health/trauma-recovery

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

42 Taylor, J., & Hocken, K. (2021). Hurt people hurt people: using a trauma sensitive and compassion focused approach to support people to understand and manage their criminogenic needs. Journal of Forensic Practice, 23 (3), 301-315. doi.org/10.1108/JFP- 08-2021-0044 Ward, T. (2017). Ethical issues in the treatment of offenders. Individual Psychological Therapies in Forensic Settings , 213–227. doi.org/10.4324/9781315666136-13 United States Sentencing Commission. (2017, October 25). Federal alternative-to-incarceration court programs. United States Sentencing Commission . https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/federal-alternative-incarceration-court- programs

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

9-2 Final Project Submission. Evaluation Report

Related Documents