Topic: SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT PROVIDES OFFENDERS REHABILITATION

Transcription

1 1 Topic: SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT PROVIDES OFFENDERS REHABILITATION OR PUNISHES THEM IN PRISONS? Paper Type: Research Paper Word Count: 1500 words Pages: 6 pages Referencing Style: APA Education Level: Masters

2 2 RUNNING HEAD: SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT PROVIDES OFFENDERS REHABILITATION OR PUNISHES THEM IN PRISONS? Should the Government Provides Offenders Rehabilitation or Punishes Them in Prisons? [Student s Name] [Name of Institution]

3 3 Should the Government Provides Offenders Rehabilitation or Punishes Them in Prisons? Introduction In the wake of growing economic constraints and increasing crime rates people have begin to argue that the rehabilitation provision are not only counterproductive but also sucking tax payers money. Belier of this ideology urges that offenders should be kept in prison. This paper has critically reviewed that government should provide effective rehabilitation to offenders. Although punishment is the logical consequence of any criminal offence and its enforcement is the guarantor of rule of law in any country. From the ancient times there has been a tradition of putting the offenders of law in to prison. However, after the 2nd World War, a new doctrine of social defense was born. According to this approach, the better protection of society against crime and more human is to make the rehabilitation of offenders. Such recovery shall be by any means, taking into account the dignity of individuals by giving them a sense of social responsibility. In practice, this doctrine has had a significant influence on the humanization of detention, rehabilitation of the offender (Kirby, B, 1954). Discussion There are two main purposes for punishment of crimes: retribution and rehabilitation. Retribution essentially seeks to punish criminals and teach them a lesson to prevent future occurrences. It is a kind of payback and many people believe it is the only fair way to deal with criminals because they have harmed society and should therefore be harmed themselves. In other

4 4 words, many want criminals to suffer and to be deprived of any pleasures as payment for their crimes. Others think it is better in the long run to rehabilitate criminals so if and when they get released hack to society they will have been fixed, so to speak. This side feels it s better to treat prisoners well. Teach them work skills, and counsel them to get them ready for the outside world and to ensure freed prisoners will seek a productive and law abiding life. Studies do seem to show there is much less recidivism with prisoners who were through rehabilitation programs in jail rather than simply spending unproductive time in a cell. There are, of course. Unrepentant criminals, who no matter what are done with them, will not change their ways. But the entire prison population should not be punished because of a few bad apples. There should be administrative processes that separate prisoners who can't be rehabilitated and those who arc needy willing and able to engage in a process that will benefit them in the long run (Lipsey, 1999). There are two main purposes for punishment of crimes: retribution and rehabilitation. Retribution essentially seeks to punish criminals and teach them a lesson to prevent future occurrences. it is a kind of payback and many people believe it is the only fair way to deal with criminals because they have harmed society and should therefore be harmed themselves. In other words, many want criminals to suffer and to be deprived of any pleasures as payment for their crimes (Lipsey, 1999). Others think it is better in the long run to rehabilitate criminals so if and when they get released hack to society they will have been fixed, so to speak. This side feels it s better to treat prisoners well. Teach them work skills, and counsel them to get them ready for the outside world and to ensure freed prisoners will seek a productive and law abiding life. Studies do seem to show there is

5 5 much less recidivism with prisoners who were through rehabilitation programs in jail rather than simply spending unproductive time in a cell. There are, of course. Unrepentant criminals, who no matter what are done with them, will not change their ways. But the entire prison population should not be punished because of a few bad apples. There should be administrative processes that separate prisoners who can't be rehabilitated and those who arc needy willing and able to engage in a process that will benefit them in the long run (Lipsey, 1999). The model or approach of rehabilitation of offenders rather punishing them in prison is based on the principles of risk, need and responsibility is used with increasing success for the assessment and rehabilitation of criminals around the globe. this model has three core feature, the risk principle presented in this model argues that offender s behavior can well be predicted reliably and that treatment should be focused on offenders who pose high, the need factor implies the significance of criminological aspects in the planning and delivery of rehabilitation or treatment, and the principle of responsibility explains how treatment should be extended (Liron et al., 1975). Few people believe that it s a waste of tax payer s many to invest in rehabilitation programs because its counterproductive approach as the crime rate is ever growing besides costing huge sum of money. This ideology of "nothing works" takes the center of the criminal justice system, mainly the United States. If we make a judgment that criminal or offenders should be left in prison offenders without even attempt to prevent crime and assisting them towards a normal life how should our country than respond to the issue of ever increasing crime? Among the prisoners in jails there are many that deserve the punishment or imprisonment to control the criminal behavior. However, after years of use in severe penalties, not only the prison

6 6 and probation population has peaked, However, the facts show that punishment has had almost no effect on crime control, in some situations, punishment and prison environment has even aggravated the crime (Pratt, Cullen, 2005). Surely we owe to the ideology of the "nothing works", researchers become more thorough in their assessments of offender s treatment as they developed a theoretical model to define why some interventions work some of them don t (Andrews et al., 1990). According to the principle of risk, there are two dimensions of risk. The first stresses the importance of reliable prediction of criminal behavior, and hence the need to use risk assessment instruments based on proven facts. The second signify the need to carefully equate the service level at the risk of the criminal. This means, when the risk level increases, the intensity of treatment required reducing recidivism increases. For the reader, this may seem logical - the highest risk lawbreakers are more criminological factors that lower risk criminals and, therefore, it takes further interventions to meet their needs. However, in practice, considerable pressure to ensure that resources are focused on the lower risk criminals. After all, low-risk offenders are more cooperative and motivated to comply with treatment requirements than high-risk criminals. The lack of correlation between the concentration of treatment and the level of risk may cause a waste of resources for treatment programs and, in some cases, worse. Research works shows that the rehabilitation services provided to high-risk offenders to reduce criminal tendencies greater than those delivered to low-risk offenders. In fact, 374 applications of the principle of risk, the treatment given to high-risk criminals translates into an average variance of 10% in criminal tendencies (Dowden, Andrews 2006). Conclusion

7 7 During the past few decades, our ability to differentiate criminals in terms of risk and assist offenders to become more prosaically has increased enormously. This progress is largely explained by the model formulation based on risk, need and responsively. This does not mean that other methods of risk assessment and rehabilitation have not made significant impact in crime reduction There are, for instance, many instruments applicable risk assessment in offenders that are developed from a nonlinear optical theory, with the help of advanced psychometric technique to guide the risk assessment of violence. However, only a very low number of these risk assessment techniques and instruments are used to plan valuable and productive rehabilitating interventions (Ward et al., 2007). Intentions are not to paint a scenario where all offenders can be fully brought to normalcy, nor does this paper refuse the importance of punishment in extreme cases. Human behavior is too complex to be assessed in this short paper and so are the tools and different rehabilitation programs. It can also recognize that in some cases our society has to bear the expenses for the rehabilitation of offenders and these offenders commits crime soon after they got out of these interventions. However, the any approach whether in support of imprisonment or another punishment cannot exclude such probabilities, but by targeting crime factors, we can be able to better predict the behavior of offenders and to provide better treatment.

8 8 References Andrews, D. A., I. Zinger, R. D. Hoge, J. Bonta, P. F. T. Cullen (1990). "Does correctional treatment work? A psychologically informed meta-analysis ", Criminology, 28 (1), p: Dowden, C. D. A. Andrews (1999). "What works for female offenders: A meta-analytic review", Crime and Delinquency, 45 (1), p: Kirby, B. C. (1954). "Measuring effects of treatment of criminals and delinquents", Sociology and Social Research, 38 (1), p: Lipsey, M. W. (1999). "Can rehabilitative programs reduce the recidivism of juvenile offenders? An inquiry into the effectiveness of practical programs", Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law, 6 (1), p Lipton, D., R. Martinson J. Wilks (1975). The effectiveness of correctional treatment: A survey of treatment evaluation studies, New York, Praeger, p: Pratt, T. C. et F. T. Cullen (2005). "Assessing macro-level predictors and theories of crime: A meta-analysis, Crime and justice: A review of research, 32 (1), and p: Ward, T., J. Mesler P. M. Yates (2007). "Reconstructing the Risk-Need-Responsively model: A theoretical elaboration and evaluation", Aggression and Violent Behavior, vol. 12, no 2, p: