|
  |
|
|
Identifying Competing Theories Of Corrections Prevalent In Today's Justice System.
Contributing to creating a political and media climate in which “get tough” policies were embraced by a broad spectrum of the public and political leadership was a variety of factors. They remained largely unchallenged, despite a wealth of research documenting the limited effect of such policies on crime. A broad range of choices now exists in many courtrooms, while sentencing options were once largely limited to incarceration and probation. ( n.d. State Sentencing Reforms)
Significant new sentencing options have become available over the past few decades, which are considered intermediate sanctions. Intermediate sanctions employ sentencing alternatives that fall between outright imprisonment and simple probationary release back into the community. They are intended to provide prosecutors, judges, and corrections officials with sentencing options that permit them to apply appropriate punishments to convicted offenders while not being constrained by the traditional choice between prison and probation. These sanctions include split sentencing, shock probation or parole, shock incarceration, community service, intensive supervision, or home confinement and electronic monitoring. Working to widen the use of sentencing alternatives, one group in particular is the Sentencing Project. This group provides technical assistance to public defenders, court officials, and other community organizations. They have contributed to the development of more than 100 locally based alternative sentencing service programs. These services work in conjunction with defense attorneys to develop written sentencing plans. (2005 Schmalleger)
· Split sentencing judges may impose a combination of a brief period of imprisonment and probation, serving time in a local jail. (2005 Schmalleger)
· Shock probation the offender serves a short period of time in custody, usually in a prison and is released on probation by court order. Clients must apply for probation however, and is not guaranteed depending on the judges resentencing decision. (2005 Schmalleger)
· Shock incarceration is a military style boot camp providing highly regimented environments involving strict discipline, physical training, and hard labor. This is designed for young youth offenders and is of short duration. Offenders who successfully complete these programs are typically returned to the community with some type of supervision. (2005 Schmalleger)
· Mixed sentencing and community service require offenders serve weekends in jail and received probation supervision during the week. Some offenders are required to participate in treatment or community service programs while on probation. (2005 Schmalleger)
· Intensive probation supervision ( IPS ) is designed to achieve control in a community setting over offenders who would otherwise have been put in prison. This involves a minimum of five face-to-face contacts between the probationer and the supervisor per week, mandatory curfew, required employment, a weekly check of arrests records, routine and unannounced alcohol and drug testing, 132 hours community service, and automatic notification of probation officers via the State Crime Information Network when an IPS client is arrested. (2005 Schmalleger)
· Home confinement and electronic monitoring also referred to house arrest. Offenders are legally ordered to remain confined in their own residences and may be able to leave under medical emergencies, go to their jobs, or buy household essentials. (2005 Schmalleger)
Some correctional treatment methods used in prisons are private prison enterprise, counseling and treatment, education, vocational training, and special needs groups.
In cases where the offender is not a danger to society, but has in fact broken a criminal law such as a minor drug offense, a spit sentence could be used or depending on the particular offense counseling and treatment could also be used. In cases where a youth has committed a first time crime, instead of exposing such offenders to an environment where criminal behaviors may be reinforced, the shock incarceration could be initiated. An intensive supervision probation could be used to achieve control in a community setting over offenders who would otherwise have gone to prison. These programs can be effective at reducing recidivism, especially if the programs are well planned and fully implemented with clear missions and goals. Special handicaps, seriously or terminally ill offenders, and the mentally retarded would be better supervised through home confinement (electronic monitoring) than traditional incarceration. (2005 Schmalleger)
The desire that criminals be rehabilitated is the rationale behind rehabilitation as a judicially administered punishment. It is the common interest to create a system where those who transgress the law may be guided into becoming productive members of society. Sentencing a particular person to prison will not fulfill the interests of justice are some persuasive arguments concerning this issue.
One of the non-traditional correctional approaches is the electronic monitoring. The home confinement program in the federal court system has three components, or levels of restriction. Curfew; home detention; and home incarceration. The curfew requires the offender to remain at home everyday at certain times. Home detention requires the offender to remain at home at all times except for preapproved and scheduled absences. Home incarceration calls for a 24-hour a day lock down at home, except for medical appointments, court appearances, and other activities that the court specifically approves. (2005 Schmalleger) Electronic monitoring advantages are it reduces prison populations, government cost efficiency – fewer prison/administration costs, and improvement of rehabilitation – closer to families, work environment, etc. (n.d. Electronic Monitoring In the Criminal Justice System) Estimates that home confinement costs approximately $1,130 per year per supervised probationer and $2,190 per supervised parole. Incarceration costs are much higher, running around $18,100 per year per inmate, with another $43,756 needed to build each cell. (2005 Schmalleger)
Intensive probation supervision ( IPS ) is described the strictest form of probation for adults in the United States . This is designed to achieve control in a community setting over offenders who would otherwise been sent to prison. This program involves a minimum of five face-to-face per week contacts between the probationer and the supervising officer, required employment, mandatory curfew, routine and unannounced alcohol and drug testing, 132 community hours, a weekly check of local arrest records, and automatic notification of probation officers via the State Crime Information Network when an IPS client is arrested. (2005 Schmalleger)
The Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics ( BJS ) announced on 6/2/2002 that sixty-seven percent of former inmates released from state prisons in 1994 committed at least one serious new crime within the following three years. Those with the highest rearrest rates were those who had been incarcerated for stealing motor vehicles (79%), possessing or selling stolen property (77%), larceny (75%), burglary (74%), robbery (70%) or those using, possessing or trafficking in illegal weapons (70%). (2002 BJS )
In 2002 a study showed that IPS programs can be effective at reducing recidivism so long as they are fully planned and implemented. (2005 Schmalleger) I believe that if the two non-traditional correctional punishments described above would be implemented nationwide, it would definitely reduce the percentage of recidivism by offenders in that both are put in a community setting, close to families and may be guided into becoming productive members of society.
Reference
Schmalleger, F. (2005). Criminal Justice Today. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
(2002,6/2). Bureau of Justice Statistics Press Release. Retrieved from Two-Thirds of Former State Prisoners Rearrested For Serious New Crimes Web site: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/rpr94pr.htm
(2002, 10). Federal Sentencing Reporter. Retrieved from State Sentencing Reforms: Is the "Get Tough" Era Coming to a Close? Web site: http://www.sentencingproject.org/pdfs/mauer-statesentreform.pdf#search='alternative%20t...
(n.d.). Electronic Monitoring In the Criminal Justice System. |
|
 |
|
No reactions yet.
Please login or sign up to rate this intel.
Please login or sign up to add a comment.
The copyright for this content entitled "Identifying Competing Theories Of Corrections Prevalent In Today's Justice System. " has been specified by the contributor as:
All Rights Reserved
This content may not be copied, distributed or adapted by anyone under any circumstances.
|
|
|
This intel was contributed by D. STEVENS
D. STEVENS
|
May, 2012
2008
January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December
2009
January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December
2010
January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December
2011
January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December
2012
January, February, March, April, May
|
|
Not a member yet?
Qondio is a powerful network for making it online. If you have a website to
promote, we can help.
Sign up and get in on the action.
|
|
Welcome to Qondio! Discover the awesome power this network can deliver by going to our About page. Or you could skip straight to the Sign Up form.
|
|
