CBT Approach And Behavior Analysis

For starters, children in the juvenile correction system are not rehabilitated for drug addictions or treated for mental health conditions. Being incarcerated does nothing positive for them. These children become stuck in the cycle of arrests and reoffending, in which every time they are brought back to a facility it is now exponentially harder for them to return to be a functioning member of society. In fact, there are kids who have been trapped “in this system for decades” (Mayeux). Obviously juvenile detention policies do not work, or these children would have been reformed and not have been in the same situation for so long. Young adults stuck in this cycle get released and then are immediately back where they started when they break another law, harming the teenager’s future, and endangering public safety (Mayeux). Society, in fact, would benefit from a rehabilitory stance on juvenile crime instead of a punishing one. Juvenile detention intervenes in these at-risk children’s lives in a way that actually turns them into criminals, by imposing stereotypes on them, and treating them like they are dangerous, and not worth fixing. The American perspective on juvenile crime needs to change, because the current program is not benefitting at-risk children, or

Baer, D. M., Wofl, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (2015, 11 5). Some Current Dimensions of Applied Behavior Analysis. Retrieved from ncbi.nlm.nih.gov: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13109980/pdf/jaba00083-0089.pdf

One of the programs they review is the Multisystemic Therapy (MST) program. To prevent juveniles from repeating the same crimes they would keep them in the community instead of locking them away in jail. The juveniles would have family therapy, individual therapy, group therapy, and other types of support. As a result, “MST participants had a rate of recidivism of 22.1 percent…the individual therapy group which had a recidivism rate of 71.4 percent…those that participated only temporarily in the MST program also had a reduced recidivism rate of 46.6 percent compared to the control delinquent group MST participants had a significantly lower recidivism rate” (May, Osmond, and Billick 298). This programed showed that like the J RIP the delinquent juvenile who get help from their community are more likely to not go back to crime. The review also mentions, “one of the main goals of MST is to decrease the juvenile delinquents association with other delinquent youths, while facilitating familial support through communication and guided problem solving” (298). Because most criminals gain support from other criminals and learn new ways to commit crimes from them by keeping the influence away it shows the juveniles that that’s not the best route to

Rehabilitation for at risk teens has been an ongoing issue that runs deep in certain communities. When kids at young ages are exposed to stress and have to cope early on with dysfunction they are denied the opportunity to mature and conditioned to commit thinking errors that perpetuate a young offender into an adult offender. To find ways to break this cycle John Hubner accounts his time on the Giddings State School Capital Offenders Program and how a group of counselors are able to combine many strategies in rehabilitating young offenders who have committed serious crimes. Young people convicted of serious crimes are often transferred to adult prisons that institutionalize young people to prison life only increasing the likely hood of

This proposal will provide appropriate training to help reduce recidivism and overcrowding by changing and redirecting the offender’s way of thinking. T4C specialists will work alongside the state employees in carrying out the goals and objectives of this proposal. This team will work with the T4C co-author (Dr. Juliana Taymans, Professor of Special education, George Washington University) to select applicants to attend the T4C training program. Applicants selected will be able to train others, define the basics of cognitive behavioral approaches, communicate the core principles of the T4C program, and display self-change, social skill, and problem solving lessons (“Thinking for a Change” Train-the-Trainer for Trainers,

In class we also discussed the recidivism statistics for these habitually violent juveniles who have determinate sentences and were released from TYC. For more than 50 percent of the juveniles released from TYC reoffend for at least one felony. Had these juveniles been tried as adults and received more severe sentences, their felonies could have been avoided. Although the methods used by the staff in the Hubner book seemed to make a difference while the juveniles were there, once they left, it didn’t appear that it made a difference at all. Many of the juveniles were able to stay out of trouble for about a year, but they recommitted afterwards.

To ascertain whether practitioners attribute the desistance of young people from offending behaviour to the effective practice of targeted youth programs. Young offender’s recidivism has been said to be the consequence of ridiculous control programs attracting reduced compliance from young offenders according to (Kempen and Young 2014). Practitioners competences has been put under scrutiny with critiques such as (Andrews, Donald and James 2010) and (Petrosino et all 2010), alleging that they sometimes deviate from their professional requisites. Much of the criticism was specifically for the private practitioners rendering inconsistent treatment regime, lacking commitment to the recommended practice. Thus, this evident knowledge gap has failed young offenders to satisfy the targeted programs aims of desisting from antisocial behaviours and other criminal activities (Woods et al

A form of intervention that continually arises in research looking at young offenders is the use of cognitive behavioural therapy or modification. Cognitive Behavioural therapy is founded on social learning, and adopts the theory that offenders have learned unsuitable ways of behaving due to their environment (McGuire, 2003). Many intervention plans include this type of treatment, sometimes coupled with psychiatric treatments (Jones, Chancey, Lowe & Risler, 2010). Cognitive behavioural techniques encourage offenders to think through a situation, instead of ensuing their immediate response. A reaction that can often be impetuous and self-centered attitudes that increase the likelihood of anti-social behavior (McGuire, 2003). In cognitive behavioural therapy an offenders learning is conditioned, they are trained to eradicate maladaptive actions (McGuire, 2003). Cognitive, rehabilitation or intervention programs aim to bring changes

Therefore, numerous interventions have been designed to address and redirect specific behaviors of delinquent youth who are at-risk for recidivism or who have been incarcerated and are facing greater involvement within the juvenile justice system (Youth.Gov, 2017). More importantly, not every intervention works with every youth offender. The key is to focus on each youth as an individual and not as a population.

The goals of juvenile corrections are too deter, rehabilitate and reintegrate, prevent, punish and reattribute, as well as isolate and control youth offenders and offenses. Each different goal comes with its own challenges. The goal of deterrence has its limits; because rules and former sanctions, as well anti-criminal modeling and reinforcement are met with young rebellious minds. Traditional counseling and diversion which are integral aspects of community corrections can sometimes be ineffective, and studies have shown that sometimes a natural self intervention can take place as the youth grows older; resulting in the youth outgrowing delinquency.

Studies suggest that there is a divide between the government and public response to juvenile incarceration. Bullis & Yovas (2005) state that support is given to correctional facilities to house juvenile offenders as a form of punishment (as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 17). Individuals who support this perspective are often more likely to support the construction of more prisons and stern penalties on crime based upon the presumptions that youthful offenders are aware of the consequences of their actions (Drakeford, 2002 as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 17). On the other hand, opponents of this perspective believe that incarceration creates an opportunity to rehabilitate the offenders (Huffine, 2006 as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 18). This perspective supports the purpose of juvenile detention centers as “preparatory in nature – that is, offering services focused on the development of skills needed to return successfully to mainstream

Conceptually consistent programs within behavior analysis are those programs that use the principles of operant learning theory. Sensory integration and mindfulness therapies are not conceptually consistent with the principles of behavior analysis.

Lastly, but not least is CBT. It combines the elements of cognitive and behavioral treatments in addressing psychological problems and abnormal behavior, in this case sexual offenders. The Good Lives Model-Comprehensive (Ward & Gannon, 2006) is a good representitive for CBT, as it combines the original Good Lives Model of Offender rehabilitation and the Integrated Theory of Sexual Offending. Both of which have been the prior use to helping sexual offenders. However, not all of these treatments are effective and have limitations. (Maletzky & Steinhauser, 2002) conducted a 25 year follow up on 7275 sexual offenders who were in a CBT. The results show the treatment generated long-lasting, positive results by reducing recidivism and risk to the community. Now that the types of treatments have been explained, the next section goes into the existing literature of those treatments on sexual offenders and what’s the best/worst.

Today we are talking about if juvenile justice systems are beneficial or not. In my opinion I think they are because the correctional officers are always trying their best to let these kids have another chance to change their lives. In addition people might say that if you put a juvenile in a justice system that it won’t make a difference but I don’t think so. They actually have proof that the kids do change. According to the article “Character-building, not jail time, in a Texas juvenile court program” it states “the program is about more than simply telling the boys to stay out of trouble. He and his team teach the boy’s life lessons about accountability, respect, responsibility and empathy.” Which is stating that even

4. Why it is important to you to study this discipline in a school that emphasizes cultural awareness, competence, and understanding of diversity (see our Commitment to Diversity Statement).