There is long debate over the purpose of our prisons and our correctional system, specifically whether the system should focus more on the punishment of prisoners, or the rehabilitation of prisoners. Right now, elements of both punishment and rehabilitation are present in the correctional system but disagreement remains as to whether this is beneficial, or if greater focus should be placed more on one single goal rather than attempting to balance both. One of the best ways to see which of these two focuses is better is through studying individual cases to see the effects rehabilitative or punitive methods have on the individual, as will be done throughout this paper. The case that will be discussed is a first time male offender, whose name …show more content…
While the purpose of these files is to assess the male offender’s eligibility of parole it has the added benefit of showing the affects that rehabilitative programs can have on the offender and his chances of parole. This essay will argue, with reference to the case discussed, that while both goals of punishment serve a purpose within the criminal justice system, that the goal of rehabilitation is the more important of the two. The principal reason for the importance of rehabilitation is that it reduces the recidivism rate for re-offending. Through correctional programs, educational programs, social programs and vocational programs, prisoners can be rehabilitated and reduce their chances of re-offending (Government of Canada, …show more content…
When asked the question at the start of the year my opinion was the same as it was after conducting extensive research into the issue. The opinion being that rehabilitation serves far more benefit to society than the punishment ideology. Not knowing of the empirical evidence surrounding the issues my opinion generated from the fact that prisoners are as much a part of larger society as anyone else, or more properly said, we cannot look at prisoners as an opposed group to the rest of the society and instead must recognize them as part of the society and part of the larger concept of human behaviour that surrounds us all (Rich and Ashby 2014, 272). In doing this we can better understand the reasons why a crime was committed in the first place as well as better prevent re-offending in the future and respecting an individual’s right to a second chance. After researching the benefits of the rehabilitation and the draw backs of the punishment model, my opinion which was originally primarily based on my own moral feelings became one based in fact and empirical evidence. This research and analysis will be shown in the following section with reference to the real life case of the male offender in order to show firsthand the positive, far-reaching, effects of rehabilitative
Canada’s criminal justice system largely focuses on rehabilitation, but Bourque’s harsh sentence is similar to the sentencing practices of the United States (Gagnon 2015). This is troubling as Canada’s rehabilitation focused criminal justice system appears to be working. Canada has a low rate of recidivism for offenders who have been convicted of murder (Gagnon 2015). Research shows that Canada’s rehabilitation focused criminal justice system has also worked with crimes that are not as severe as murder. Between 2010/2011 and 2013/2014, there was a 12% decrease in completed adult criminal court cases. Most cases in adult criminal court involve non-violent offenses (Maxwell 2013/2014). Similarly, in 2013, the police-reported crime rate was at it lowest since 1969 (Statistics Canada). The homicide rate is also declining, as in 2013, it represented less than 1% of all violent crime (Statistics Canada). Notably, probation was the most common sentence given in adult court cases and custody sentences were less than six months (Maxwell, 2013/2014). These types of sentences showcase the rehabilitation focused thinking of the Canadian criminal justice system and reinforce the impact and possible repercussions of Justin Bourque’s
There is no simple right or wrong solution, there is simply choosing the best and most appropriate choice for the specific case. Choosing to use the combination of rehabilitation and deterrence is quite conflicting of one another. But some cases call for help and treatment, and so call for punishment. There are so many factors that contribute to a case, that the decision can be altered so fast by the smallest detail. The criminal justice system is complex, brutal, and sometimes unfair, but deciding on the right goal for the criminal can make all the
Prisons and correctional facilities in the United States have changed from rehabilitating people to housing inmates and creating breeding grounds for more violence. Many local, state, and federal prisons and correctional facilities are becoming more and more overcrowded each year. If the Department of Corrections (DOC) wants to stop having repeat offenders and decrease the volume of inmates entering the criminal justice system, current regulations and programs need to undergo alteration. Actions pushed by attorneys and judges, in conjunction current prison life (including solitary confinement), have intertwined to result in mass incarceration. However, prisoner reentry programs haven’t fully impacted positively to help the inmate assimilate back into society. These alterations can help save the Department of Corrections (DOC) money, decrease the inmate population, and most of all, help rehabilitate them. After inmates are charged with a crime, they go through the judicial system (Due Process) and meet with the prosecutor to discuss sentencing.
In a modern Western society where there is significant amount of research done of rehabilitation and criminal justice reform, the practice of sentencing JLWOP (Juvenile Life Without Parole) seems outdated and primitive. There are a number of prominent human rights groups that advocate for the banning of the LWOP sentence for juvenile offenders. In his 2010 article for the Journal of Offender Rehabilitation titled ‘Extinguishing All Hope: Life-Without-Parole for Juveniles,’ Frank Butler breaks down the ethical arguments against the sentence from a social policy perspective. He uses a number of pertinent facts and dates to support and enhance his argument, but retains a clear and concise presentation style, making the document easy to read and comprehend on an analytical level. It is clear from his title that it is not an objective piece, but his opinion is supporte...
The Criminal Justice system was established to achieve justice. Incarceration and rehabilitation are two operations our government practices to achieve justice over criminal behavior. Incarceration is the punishment for infraction of the law and in result being confined in prison. It is more popular than rehabilitation because it associates with a desire for retribution. However, retribution is different than punishment. Rehabilitation, on the other hand is the act of restoring the destruction caused by a crime rather than simply punishing offenders. This may be the least popular out of the two and seen as “soft on crime” however it is the only way to heal ruptured communities and obtain justice instead of punishing and dispatching criminals
Canada is a country where rehabilitation has been a formal part of sentencing and correctional policies for an extended period of time (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Furthermore, a group of Canadian researchers have examined the methodology and effectiveness of rehabilitation, and are principal figures in the correctional rehabilitation field (Cullen & Gendreau, 2000). However, despite rehabilitation being a central aspect of Canadian identity, there has been a shift in the justice system’s objectives. The rise of the Conservative government and their omnibus bill C-10, Safe Streets and Communities Act, has created a move towards retribution. Bill C-10 was passed on March 12, 2012 (Government of Canada, 2013) and was a proposal to make fundamental changes to almost every component of Canada’s criminal justice system. Law changes included new and increased mandatory minimum sentencin...
In this essay, I shall be focusing on the whether or Prisons rehabilitate offenders. I will
As the current prison structures and sentencing process continues to neglect the issues that current offenders have no change will accrue to prevent recidivism. The issue with the current structure of the prison sentencing process is it does not deal with the “why” the individual is an social deviant but only looks at the punishment process to remove the deviant from society. This method does not allow an offender to return back to society without continuing where they left off. As an offender is punished they are sentenced (removal from society) they continue in an isolated environment (prison) after their punishment time is completed and are released back to society they are now an outsider to the rapidly changing social environment. These individuals are returned to society without any coping skills, job training, or transitional training which will prevent them from continuing down th...
High rates of recidivism demonstrate that the judicial system has been unsuccessful in determining criminal activity. Alternatives to incarceration known as restorative justice has existed for centuries, yet has only been recently implicated into the Canadian judicial system. The practices of restorative justice have been proven very successful for minor offences among adults and youth in bringing together the offenders, victims, and the community. However, acts of violence and serious offences committed by youths have no place in these resolutions. The act of violence is traumatizing to the victim. There is a high chance of re-conviction of a violent offence and these types of offences are too complicated to be resolved outside of the judicial system.
...apabilities to deal with this which is not the case so much nowadays as Tony Marshall (1999) argues. There are criticisms over procedures, loss of rights such as an independent and impartial forum as well as the principle of proportionality in sentencing. There is also an unrealistic expectation that restorative justice can produce major changes in deviant behaviour, as there is not enough evidence to support this claim (Cunneen, 2007). Levrant et al (1999) on the other hand suggests that restorative justice still remains unproven in its’ effectiveness to stop reoffending and argues that its appeal lies in its apparent morality and humanistic sentiments rather than its empirical effectiveness. He continues to argue that it allows people to feel better within themselves through having the moral high ground rather than focusing on providing justice to the offender.
All over America, crime is on the rise. Every day, every minute, and even every second someone will commit a crime. Now, I invite you to consider that a crime is taking place as you read this paper. "The fraction of the population in the State and Federal prison has increased in every single year for the last 34 years and the rate for imprisonment today is now five times higher than in 1972"(Russell, 2009). Considering that rate along crime is a serious act. These crimes range from robbery, rape, kidnapping, identity theft, abuse, trafficking, assault, and murder. Crime is a major social problem in the United States. While the correctional system was designed to protect society from offenders it also serves two specific functions. First it can serve as a tool for punishing the offender. This involves making the offender pay for his/her crime while serving time in a correctional facility. On the other hand it can serve as a place to rehabilitate the offender as preparation to be successful as they renter society. The U.S correctional system is a quite controversial subject that leads to questions such as how does our correctional system punish offenders? How does our correctional system rehabilitate offenders? Which method is more effective in reducing crime punishment or rehabilitation? Our correctional system has several ways to punish and rehabilitate offenders.
Throughout this paper, the aim has been to explain the importance and application of restorative justice, whose goals are restitution and reintegration of the offender back into society. As Fish establishes, there has always been an underlying aim of retribution since biblical times, yet we have not seen the fruits of the seeds that were sown in those times. It is suggested that a greater commitment of reintegration with respect to released prisoners into the community is also important. Alternatively, there should be a greater hospitable approach taken once they have completed their sentences and face the challenges of re-entering and managing the adjustment back into society. That is people with the discipline of forgiveness, a community who can bring down existing
For many years, there have been a huge debate on the ideal of reform versus punishment. Many of these debates consist of the treatment and conditioning of individuals serving time in prison. Should prison facilities be a place solely to derogate freewill and punish prisoners as a design ideology of deterrence? Should prison facilities be design for rehabilitation and conditioning, aim to educate prisoners to integrate back into society.
The purpose of this paper is to verify whether rehabilitation is performed in prisons or in criminal substitutes to integrate deprived of freedom individuals into society. The jail is a place where people are kept when they have been arrested and are being punished for a crime (Merriam-webster). This aims to rehabilitate and incorporate the prisoner to society as one able to live in it, without the need to re-offend. But are the prisons meeting the requirements? Is our society is adapted to receive an offender rehabilitated? Does the system is encouraged to fulfill its purpose or is the system to the edge of bankruptcy? Once imprisonment, as a sanction in the conviction is applied, the system must begin their treatment, which aims to achieve
Rehabilitation in the community can either be a good thing or a bad thing depending on how the person looking at it, some people may say its good because they get to get out of jail faster and get help in trying to get a job and maintain that job. And some people can say its bad because they get out of jail to soon and risk the possibility of him or her going back to there ways and committing another crime because the temptation is still there. Through out this essay I will be talking about how the rehabilitation can benefit the community and how it can also put people in danger even though the offender is being monitored by a care taker.