History And Development Of Community Based Corrections

1130 Words3 Pages

I will be talking about the history and development of community based corrections. To start off, it is undoubtedly true that there is a need for alternatives to prison sentences simply due to the fact that both prisons and jails are overcrowded. Especially when Canada and the United States have the highest rates of incarceration of all Western democratic countries. Canadian prison and penitentiary populations are increasing rapidly by 12% between 1989/1990 and 22% in 1994/1995. In short, the need for options to avoid further jail and prison sentencing is arguably the main reason behind the development of community based corrections. As states continue to struggle for the appropriate resources to house offenders sentenced to longer periods of incarceration, the need for alternatives that allow the goals of punishment and rehabilitation to be met led to an increased use of reintegration strategies that include programs such as work release, half-way houses, fine options, and electronic monitoring. Community corrections, therefore, provides alternatives at both the front end and the back end of the correctional system. Meeting both the goals of punishing and rehabilitation. Probation is arguably the most common program of community corrections. Probation has been used as a means of avoiding further crowding in jails and prisons. You may think community corrections wouldn’t exist if not for the overcrowding problems rising in prisons, but this is untrue, as community corrections is often implemented in jurisdictions that do not have overcrowding problems.
It should also be considered that the use of community corrections often exists as a first choice among sanctions and that these programs are still heavily used today due to the fa...

... middle of paper ...

... been made available to all who were literate.
Lastly, during the late 1700s, judicial reprieve became popular for judges in England to use as an alternative method of punishment. Basically, judicial reprieve suspended sentences of incarceration as an act of mercy or leniency. It was used in cases where judges did not believe that incarceration was proportionate to the crime or in cases where no productive benefit was expected. Of course, this alternative was used for offenders who committed minor offences or were first-timers. While the offender was on reprieve, the offender kept their liberties and freedoms. Upon the expiration of a specified period of time, the offender was then able to apply to the Crown of England for a full pardon. Judicial reprieve has been said to be a method used by judges who, “recognized that not all offenders are dangerous, evil persons.”

Open Document