Response To Recidivism

Many offenders who are released from prison encounter many obstacles which hinder their progress towards community re-entry. On their own, many fail to secure employment, housing, or complete education or training programs. Without guidance or assistance many offenders return to crime to support themselves. Fortunately there are number of organizations that see the need for services to assist offenders on their path back into the community. One such organization that has proven to be successful is the Safer Foundation.

Characteristics of Offenders and therapists should be matched as well, which would seek to ensure that the offender, therapist and the program will produce the results that are expected. Program contingencies and

One of the most talked bout problems on the definition of recidivism is how unclear it can be. It has such a broad measure due to it not being broken down to one topic (ex. just convictions, just arrests, or even more importantly just acknowledging the amount of returns to prison). The BJS mentioned earlier (Bureau of Justice Statistics) studies the measures that the rate of recidivism by number of arrests, yet the one problem with it is just because you’re arrested doesn’t mean you are found guilty. Professor Edward Latessa, director of the School of Criminal Justice at the University of Cincinnati claims “If you define it as a return to prison and you follow for a year, you’ll have a much lower rate,”

The revolving door of recidivism is extremely different than it was only just a few decades ago though. Nowadays there are so much more offenders being arrested and released from prison than there was in the past. Not to mention most of them nowadays have served significantly longer prison terms than those offenders in the past, which in turn contributes to recidivism and the increasing rates over the years. Very few and far in between ever really received the benefit of the vast rehab or even pre release programs in the prisons, so in turn they end up right back where there started. They go in without and education and they come out without an education; they go in with no social skills and come out with no skills, they go in criminal and come out an even better criminal. How does that all work?? Who knows but lock them up.

Diversion programs have evolved over time. There are countless programs available with which they all aim to reduce recidivism within the correctional system. We’re going to discuss fome of the programs and their effectiveness.

Public safety is best secured by a comprehensive system that executes imprisonment for the most serious offender and supervision for offenders who are reentering society. As offenders transition from prison back to the community, the primary objective of intermediate sanctions is to protect public safety through alternatives other than incarceration. Rehabilitative and treatment programs must be provided within an institutional setting and in the community to minimize the risks of public safety. Seventy-eight percent of convicted offenders are supervised in the community. Some fear that restorative programs could result in sanctions imposed on individuals, especially juveniles, who would have simply been forgotten if intermediate sanctions

Most findings indicate that punishment, deterrence, incapacitation and restitution are ineffective ways to reduce crime. It is noted that if the same resource monies could be redirected rehabilitation, the cost to the tax- payer would be reduced over time (Gertz et al, 2005). Rehabilitative programs are the most effective in reaching our ultimate goal of reducing crime and reducing future criminal behavior which is the purpose of incarceration. The problem with rehabilitation is that it is the most difficult to proof effective and even more difficult to persuade policy makers and community members to fund (Pinard, 2010). There are at

Reintegration back to society for ex-convicts involves numerous hurdles to overcome. Each day, roughly 1,600 prisoners are released (Petersilia, 2003 pg3) back to their communities. Easier said than done, these individuals have to continue where they left off. The issues that come along with this all relate to how these individuals will succeed at their second chance. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2011-2012 an estimated 40 percent of federal and state inmates reported having chronic medical conditions (Berzosky, 2015). Other research suggests that 75 percent of inmates are illiterate at the 12th-grade level (Rosario, 2010). Medical conditions, lack of social skills, lack of work-training, and lack of education, along with a criminal history is a recipe for hardship that ex-convicts face; often leading to recidivism.

Social reintegration in order to be successful must integrate and effective and efficient continuum of care from the incarceration stage to the release stage and beyond. This requires a close collaborative effort between the probation officer, social workers, health and therapeutic intervention agencies as well as the offender's family, and community-based organizations. All intervention should be established to address the individual needs of the offender. Creating a system where the probation officer can set up accountability (UA’s, check-ins, curfew) based on the pendency of the individual, in collaboration the social worker will then work on the coordination of therapeutic efforts needed by the individual (substance abuse, domestic violence treatment, offender specific treatment, registration, transitional

Recidivism. We have heard that word over and over and yet we seem to find ourselves with the same problem, the overcrowding of jails, or even individuals reoffending. In many ways, people believe that punishing for a crime does not work and one of the most effective ways to prevent individuals from re-offending is simple, rehabilitation. Throughout the following essay we will be discussing a particular drug offense and consider a type of rehabilitation program in which would best serve that particular offender.

2. Council of State Governments Justice Center. Reducing Recidivism: States Deliver Results. New York. Council of State Government

of the time. They offer their insight on effective corrections and individualizing treatments based on predictors for crime and behavioral knowledge, as well as conclude that recidivism is reduced by rehabilitation.

Non-custodial services with an emphasis on rehabilitation are more effective than prison sentences, providing that the offender and the community in which they are being reintroduced cooperate. The offender must be committed to being reintegrated into society and to absolving their guilt. Likewise, the offender must address any substance abuse problems, or mental health issues in order to be successfully inserted back into society. Additionally, the community must be willing to accept, employ, and supervise the offender in order to prevent recidivism which is the criminal relapse of an individual.

In this effort, I will offer an empirically supported approach by communicating with post-release recidivists about compliance and behavior change. I will argue that the sole focus on punishment actually makes recidivism worse and to implement programs and policies that actually work to reduce crime and mass incarceration.

Many studies have been conducted over the years. All with the goal to learn how to reduce crime and increase public safety. Incarcerating criminals will remove them from society for a period of time, this an attempt to increase public safety (Gendreau, Goggin,Cullen, 1999). Incarceration is also used as a goal for deterring offenders from committing any other criminal acts (Gendreau, Goggin,Cullen, 1999). For individuals with addictions or psychological disorders incarceration alone may not be effective. Rehabilitation has also been studied and used with the goal of changing the thought process of criminals and providing services to help with mental illnesses. However, incarceration nor rehabilitation alone will not increase public safety and reduce crime, it is a combination of both factors that will contribute to reducing crime while increasing the safety of the public.