Offender's Propensity Toward Incarceration

Combating recidivism and the continuously growing prison population has been an ongoing problem that has been steadily draining federal, state, and local budgets. In a vain attempt to reduce recidivism the criminal justice system made sentences harsher, which in turn lead to more prisons being built to house the booming prison population. For almost 30 years’ researchers have sought answers for why so many criminals return to crime within five years of being released. These

Inmates are released with few if any resources and usually end up returning to the institution after failing to reestablish productive lives in the community. This alarming reality is both a fiscal and social problem: state budget deficits bring enormous prison expenditures to light as social injustices in the system persist. Reforming the system to end the cycle of incarceration will have positive effects on the bottom line while reducing crime and thereby increasing public safety. Clearly, the deterrence effects of harsh prison sentences have not been effective. It may be time to once again embrace and expand the rehabilitative capacity of the criminal justice system.

It is thought that punishment prevents an individual from committing a future crime, or reoffending. Despite this belief, research examining the effects of incarceration and prison conditions has demonstrated

The United States is the world’s leader in incarceration with 2.2 million people currently in the nation’s prisons or jails. Incarceration is a widely argued topic with many understood viewpoints, and it directly deals with three main important correctional topics which are deterrence, rehabilitation, and recidivism. The definition of incarceration is the state of being confined in prison. Not only does incarceration affect people directly by taking away their freedom, but it also affects their lives once their incarceration is served. There is not a whole lot to do about people being incarcerated, however, there may be ways to help the incarcerated once their freedom is restored.

In the last few decades, there has been an increase in the number of individuals who have been incarcerated in both federal and state prisons. Indeed, research has shown that harsher sentencing policies and more punitive laws have resulted in the incarceration of more than 2.3 million people in the varied jails and prisons; thereby making the United States the leader as far as incarceration is concerned. Incarceration and sentencing systems have conventionally been aimed at having varying goals including rehabilitation, incapacitation, punishment and deterrence. Recent decades have seen the enactment of sentencing policy initiatives with the aim of enhancing the criminal justice systems deterrent effect.

Corrections are an important part of the criminal justice system and they work in concert with law enforcement and the courts. Citizens in the United States expect criminals to be monitored, with some in secured facilities, so they will not fear of becoming continual victim of crime. To illustrate this expectation further, there are 2.5 million individuals on probation or parole and 1 million individuals in jails or prisons (Morris & Tonry, 2013, p. 370). However, does every individual confined in jails and prisons still need to be there or is there a better way to deal with certain special prison populations? Due to the large number of prisoners within the correctional system, certain special populations of inmates do not receive the rehabilitation or care needed to successfully reintegrate back into society. Additionally, these special populations create an undue burden on the correctional system in terms of financial costs associated with their confinement. There are changes that can be made to the criminal justice system to accommodate special populations of inmates. This paper will explore the alternative

The United States criminal justice system has failed to rehabilitate criminals. Even after being punished for their crimes, convicts continue their wrongdoings without having gained valuable lessons from being incarcerated and are sent back to prison. Jails are supposed to aid those imprisoned by helping them gain skills that will reduce future occurrences and enable them to act morally in society. Punishing criminals is not as productive as it is thought to be, shown by the increased incarceration rate from 250,000 in 1976 to almost 2 million by 2003 (Lynch 26, 49). Instead of learning how to work towards managing their problems, prisoners are expected to learn from their mistakes by being

The United States prison population has expanded at an increasingly rapid rate over that past several decades. Each day, more and more criminal offenders are sent to prisons; most of which were designed to house fewer inmates but are now packed to their limits. This “mass- incarceration era” as many scholars and commentators of the Criminal Justice System call it, is a result of several key issues that have created an environment within the correctional system that forces many inmates to serve longer prison sentences while increasing recidivism rates. Current federal and state sentencing policies have resulted in historically high rates of offender recidivism and the highest incarceration rates in the world (Warren, 2007). As a result, prison population and overcrowding has rapidly increased and has become a serious issue across the country however, a reform in sentencing policies, more early-release incentives, and reintegration back into society through rehabilitation will help reduce recidivism and prevent the continuing rise of prison populations. (change once paper is complete)

Today’s prisons do not effectively rehabilitate criminals, they are likely to reoffend and be incarcerated multiple times. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, “At least 95% of inmates in the U.S. state prisons will return to their communities upon release, and more than 66% will be rearrested within three years.” (Beyer 2). The majority of prisoners who are in the same environment both before and after they were arrested continue to break the law. If jails and prisons focused more on rehabilitating criminals rather than only punishment, this number is likely to decrease. Prisons in the United states are overcrowded. This became a legal issue in 2011, when the Supreme Court required a reduction in California’s prison population by over 40,000 inmates. (Beyer 1). Cramming too many prisoners together does not benefit any party in the correctional system, and it is likely to cause more issues between prisoners. This also puts the safety of prison guards and correctional officers in jeopardy, because physical altercations between prisoners are more likely to occur. 676 per 100,000 people in the United States are imprisoned, which is the largest incarceration rate in the world. (Beyer 2). This number could decrease with a prison system that focused on a prisoner’s need as an individual. This includes education, job preparedness, and a plan for life

The growth in the number of incarcerated individuals is in contrast to evidence that shows increased incarceration is not the solution to the community safety challenge in America. The apparent disregard for alternative correctional methods has necessitated a complete overhaul of the American penal system.

As a country, we should care about all of our citizens and work toward bettering them, because we are only as strong as our weakest link. When it concerns the issue of corrections it should not be a discussion of punishment or rehabilitation. Instead, it should be a balance of both that puts the spotlight on rehabilitating offenders that are capable and willing to change their lives for the better. Through rehabilitation a number of issues in the corrections field can be solved from mental health to overcrowding. More importantly, it allows offenders the chance to do and be better once released from prison. This paper analyzes what both rehabilitation and punishment are as well as how they play a part in corrections. It also discusses the current reasons that punishment as the dominant model of corrections is not as effective as rehabilitation. After explaining rehabilitation and punishment, then breaking down the issues with punishment, I will recommend a plan for balance. A plan that will lower incarceration rates and give offenders a second chance.

The tension between rehabilitation and punishment has been increasing dramatically. This is because there have been sharp rises in the prison population and repeat offender rates. When one area is over emphasized in relation to the other, there is the possibility that imbalances will occur. Over the course of time, these issues can create challenges that will impact the criminal justice system and society at large. (Gadek, 2010) (Clear, 2011) (Gatotch, 2011)

There is significant variability in the outcome connected with the type of treatment, for example, how well it is put into action, and the personality of the wrongdoer to whom it is applied. Programs used to re-establish offenders to lessen recidivism are effective if they include proven standards and are aimed to the detailed needs of the offenders; this type of rehabilitation treatments are time and again positive and reasonably significant. The specific sources of that variability have not been well explored, but some principles for effective treatment have emerged (Cullen & Lipsey, 2007). Offenders who gain their high school equivalency diploma while incarcerated are prone to get a job after release, researchers reveal. In addition, those who go through vocational training are highly probable to get jobs with better wages and offenders that went through any drug treatment program during incarceration are less probable to go back to using drugs outside of confinement. When effective programs are implemented, offenders that recidivism could be reduced by 15 to 20 percent (Petersilia, 2011). This is not to express that criminology is a challenge that can always be resolved. There is an explanation for why people go to prison and depending on the circumstances there is incredibly little or nothing can be done to alter the options

Convicting, sentencing, and imprisoning are just the first few steps of reducing crime. All the effort, time, and money that go into keeping criminals locked up and off the streets are really for nothing in the end if he or she commits the same crime again after release. James Haley, who is the book editor of “Prisons” points out, “Every year, close to six hundred thousand inmates are released from state and federal prisons around the country. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, two-thirds of former convicts commit new crimes and one-half are re-incarcerated within three years of being released from prison” (138). Are US prisons truly effective when so many prisoners are committing new crimes upon release? It is for the better interests of American safety that some prisoners are locked up for life, but this should not include the constant return of re-offenders. The life of most convicts involves committing a crime and being sentenced to jail only to repeat the same process again. Many re-offenders see incarceration as a ticket to a place to sleep and food to eat.

Criminologist and politicians have debated the effectiveness of correctional rehabilitation programs since the 1970’s when criminal justice scholars and policy makers throughout the United States embraced Robert Martinson’s credo of “nothing works” (Shrum, 2004). Recidivism, the rate at which released offenders return to jail or prison, has become the most accepted outcome measure in corrections. The public's desire to reduce the economic and social costs associated with crime and incarceration has resulted in an emphasis on recidivism as an outcome measure of program effectiveness. While correctional facilities continue to grow, corrections make up an increasing amount of state and federal budgets. The recidivism rate in