Reprimanding Lawbreakers

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)

Community corrections is continually changing and has been for the past one hundred years. From the early to mid-twentieth century onward it has used three major models, the medical model, community model, and the crime control model. The major turning point for the American community corrections system that led to corrections as we know it today was in 1974 when What Works? - Questions and Answers About Prison Reform by Martinson was published. The system changed practically overnight across the nation. The notion of rehabilitating offenders was dismissed and a more punitive “lock them up and throw away the key” mentality took over. Presently the corrections system is still working in the crime control model, but professionals are trying to restructure how we deal with criminal offenders during and after incarceration. The difficulty in the restructuring is finding the balance between punishing criminal offenders proportionate to their crime, but also rehabilitating them to be productive members of society once they are released so that they do not recidivate.

As the imprisoned population in the United States grows and American culture changes, rehabilitation is becoming popular among these alternatives to a standard prison system. Rehabilitation when referring to criminal justice are programs and methods used to assist prisoners in reforming themselves in order to avoid the habits that placed them in prison in the first place. These programs are becoming more popular due to the high cost of imprisonment and a change in American culture. Each prisoner costs forty thousand dollars each year to keep in prison(Weissmueller). This is money that is coming out of the taxes paid by United States citizens who aren’t even in the prison system. Alongside this, American culture is changing to be supporting of rehabilitation efforts as Americans see the effectiveness of criminal justice systems that include it. This was seen on a trip to Europe by U.S. prison officials; once they had seen the effectiveness of German and Dutch prison rehabilitation, they wanted to bring similar programs to their prisons (“People, not prisoners”). A rehabilitation based criminal justice system in the United States is gaining popularity, and as it does so it is earning the attention it needs and deserves.

Today we see five prevalent goals of corrections including retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, rehabilitation and restorative justice. Goals employed in corrections change over time depending on several factors including the trends of thought in society and issues within the prison system. Politics as well as prison overcrowding also factor into determining which goal dominates. Retribution has a long-standing history as the most culturally accepted goal because people fended for themselves prior to organized law enforcement (Bartollas, 2002, p. 71). Incapacitation, the dominant goal currently, eliminates the threat by placing the criminal outside society, typically through incarceration, and preventing the criminal from having the ability to commit additional crimes. Deterrence, like retribution, has continued as a goal throughout history. In an effort to reduce the risk of crime, law enforcement attempt to deter criminals from committing crimes. Rehabilitation gained enormous strength with an attempt at moral redemption of the offender. Reformists believed corrections needed a makeover as they worked towards rehabilitation. Rehabilitation places more focus on the individual rather than the act in an attempt to rehabilitate the person. America did not begin to look at the corrections system more substantially until the 1970s as the idea of rehabilitation fell (Bartollas, 2002, p. 75). Restorative justice promises to restore the victim as the offender

The criminal justice system is composed of four categories: law enforcement, legal counsel, courts, and corrections. I am going to focus on one of these subjects and the problems or issues that are within the corrections part of criminal justice usually refers to the events that occur after being sentenced in a court of law. During the past few decades many problems have arisen in this area, solutions have been discussed and put into use over the years as well. However, there are still problems that are being dealt with in today’s corrections.

The definition of rehabilitation according to professor Mona Lynch, is “any discourse or practices that speak transforming or normalizing the criminal into a socially defined non-deviant citizen, including psychological programs, drug treatment programs, educational and work-training programs, work and housing placement assistance, and halfway houses.” This definition of rehabilitation is unique because it focuses on outcomes, encompasses an array of inmate services, and is more multidimensional than any of the preceding works. I believe that prisoners should be treated with exactly the same degree of respect and kindness as we would hope they would show to others after they return to society. People learn by example. The Timelist program showed that offenders hearing from ex-offenders who are on the outside and are doing well is very powerful. These rehabilitation programs; The Timelist, Edovo, and the GreenHouse Program all provide evidence to support the Prison Rehabilitation Act of 1965, which devoted full attention exclusively to the crime problem in the U.S. and the high numbers of population in our prisons, by providing more flexible rehabilitation programs. It would be beneficial to every man, women, and child in America, if we were to continue providing resources for existing rehabilitation

“The history of correctional thought and practice has been marked by enthusiasm for new approaches, disillusionment with these approaches, and then substitution of yet other tactics”(Clear 59). During the mid 1900s, many changes came about for the system of corrections in America. Once a new idea goes sour, a new one replaces it. Prisons shifted their focus from the punishment of offenders to the rehabilitation of offenders, then to the reentry into society, and back to incarceration. As times and the needs of the criminal justice system changed, new prison models were organized in hopes of lowering the crime rates in America. The three major models of prisons that were developed were the medical, model, the community model, and the crime

Today’s prison system is riddled with problems, filled with corruption, crime, and little to no programs for rehabilitation. The current goal of the owners and operators of the prisons is to punish prisoners and to make as much money as possible. The welfare of the people locked in cages is not accounted for as much as it should be— safety, physical, and mental health of the inmates is should be prioritized over money and self-interest. Prison should be about rehabilitation, acknowledging the mistakes a person has made, and accepting the consequences of their actions. It should not be about dehumanization, judgment, and punishment. Therefore, I have developed a prison system based on these principles that will help people move on with

It is uncontroversial to note that the current prison system is a hostile environment. Inmates are coerced to live in an environment of constant fear and dehumanization behind zoo-like bars. Treated as criminals first, humans second, inmates are subject to unsanitary and overcrowded living conditions with the expectation that they will learn from their mistakes and emerge a new person. Nevertheless, 71% of released prisoners are convicted of a serious crime within three years, and 68% return to prison for at least one day. These high recidivism rates only magnify overcrowding, prison violence, and the already unsanitary living conditions. According to Barnett, rehabilitation as a theory of punishment arose as a reaction to the failure of this type of punishment:

Over time, the function of prisons has shifted from a process of punishing offenders, towards the rehabilitation of offenders. Rehabilitation has previously focused on reforming the character of prisoners, whereas more recently the emphasis of rehabilitation is on preventing re-offending.

Both punishment and rehabilitation are needed if the problem of crime is to be effectively addressed. However, it is not necessary that the prison provide both of these functions simultaneously. A more logical approach involves a two-stage sentence. The prison would provide the incarceration stage and punishment of criminals. After the punitive portion of the sentence, the offender would serve a post-prison sentence of intense supervision which would provide the offender with therapeutic and remedial programs. This separation of the punitive and rehabilitative obligations would allow each segment of a sentence to be more effective, would make shorter punitive sentences more palatable to the public, and, simultaneously, would maximize the use of available cell space and resources.

Throughout the 1980s, crime and corrections became very important to the public and elected officials since crime was increasing and with constant media coverage, violent crime created fear and anger and the target grew into holding offenders accountable for their conduct and the current Retributive Era came into existence. This model emphasized public safety above all else. Correctional punishments were tough with very little inmate resources. This was the return to the Classical School of criminality which believed that crime is deterred and prevented by lengthening and toughening punishments.

The debate of rehabilitating offenders in the correction system has gone on for some time. In a 2009 paper titled Offender Rehabilitation: Theory, Research and Practice, Authors Gwen Robinson and Lain Crow suggest the treatment of rehabilitating prisoners takes on three forms. 1) The mentally disordered need special places and provisions to complete rehabilitation, such as hospitals. 2) Specific issue offenders; such as anger management, sex offenders, and drug addictions, usually attend workshop and cognitive skill trainings. 3) Programs in education, work preparation, and social skills help prepare them for their release (pg.37). The goal of rehabilitation is to have the offender return to a productive place in society. They conclude by stating " We do not believe that there are any ‘magic bullets’ in offender rehabilitation, and this conclusion is supported by decades of research" (pg.163).

There is a growing concern among Americans that the punitive arm of the criminal justice system is not working to reduce crime in America. Thus, the second influence on the correctional system in the United States of America focused on restorative justice. The restorative justice movement is based on the understanding that regardless of the crime committed by a citizen and a number of years that he or she are incarcerated for at some point he or she will be released back into the mainstream of society. Restorative justice is used to help reinvigorate those citizens back into society with a better opportunity for success outside of the prison system. The correctional system is designed to help facilitate not only the incarceration of inmates but also the reintegration and monitoring of individuals who are attempting to be productive members of mainstream society. In this venue the influence of the correctional system plays an important role as guide and counselor for former inmates on his or her road to a successful and fruitful life outside of

Rehabilitation is significant to creating successful individuals out of current inmates. It promotes competency, positive behaviors, and professional as well as social success. Crime is dynamic from one place to another (Sykes, 2007). This means that the level of crime is also distinguished among people serving time in correctional facilities. As a result, there is a necessity for a focus on helping inmates cope with the problems in their areas of custody, so as to ensure that these particular people are made productive. This process can be