As the need for increasingly punitive community-based sanctions grew, the demand for a greater variety of programs and services became apparent, as did the importance of a more seamless transition from total incapacitation to total freedom of prisoners re-entering society. A variety of community corrections methods have developed over the years, one being the institution of halfway houses. To adequately understand residential community corrections, one must consider the origins, components, and effectiveness of halfway houses.
Initially halfway houses in the United States were operated by nonprofit organizations as a means for recently released prisoners to find their footing upon re-entry. Between 1816 and 1930, the function of the halfway house was to provide interim food and shelter while the offender looked for work and became financially stable enough to support themself. Participation was strictly voluntary as state support was lacking, primarily due to the fact that it was and is strongly believed ex-offenders should minimize their contact with one another. (Alarid and Del Carmen 182)
A transition to treatment and correctional supervision via halfway house in the 1950’s garnered great support as concern regarding parole revocation and crime increased. In a matter of years halfway houses began to receive government assistance and financial support. Funding sources were dramatically increased through the 1968 Safe Streets Act and a focus on community corrections was prevalent. By the time funding began to decrease in the 1980’s, halfway houses had found their place in corrections as an alternative to incarceration and a safe place for offenders to transition out of prison, reducing potential problems due to overcrowding. (A...
... middle of paper ...
...do V. Del Carmen.Community-Based Corrections. Eigth.
Belmont: Wadsworth, 2011. 179-206. Print.
Klein-Saffran, Jody. "Electronic Monitoring vs. Halfway Houses: A Study of Federal
Offenders."Alternatives to Incarceration. Fall 1995: 24-28. Web. 29 Mar. 2012. .
Lagos, David. NC Courts. NC Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission . Compendium of
Community Corrections Programs in North Carolina . Raleigh: , 2010. Web.
.
Shilton, Mary K. U.S. Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Assistance. Increasing Public
Safety Through Halfway Houses. 2003. Web.
content/3-halfway-houses-pub-safety.pdf>.
The purpose of a halfway house or also called a recovery house is generally to allow people to begin the process of reintegration with society, where monitoring and support will be provided. This is to reduce the risk of recidivism or relapse where in most cases ex-convicts would be released directly back into society. The halfway houses that is being purposed is meant solely for the reintegration of persons who have been recently released from prison or jail, others are meant for people with chronic mental health disorders, and others are for ex-convicts with substance abuse issues.
When envisioning a prison, one often conceptualizes a grisly scene of hardened rapists and murderers wandering aimlessly down the darkened halls of Alcatraz, as opposed to a pleasant facility catering to the needs of troubled souls. Prisons have long been a source of punishment for inmates in America and the debate continues as to whether or not an overhaul of the US prison system should occur. Such an overhaul would readjust the focuses of prison to rehabilitation and incarceration of inmates instead of the current focuses of punishment and incarceration. Altering the goal of the entire state and federal prison system for the purpose of rehabilitation is an unrealistic objective, however. Rehabilitation should not be the main purpose of prison because there are outlying factors that negatively affect the success of rehabilitation programs and such programs would be too costly for prisons currently struggling to accommodate additional inmate needs.
...es and cautions of jail diversion programs include safety of the public and the potential cross-purpose goals of the treatment services industry and the criminal justice system. Public safety is paramount when discussing jail diversion programs. Whatever has caused the offender to commit crime, be it substance abuse or a mental illness, does not negate the fact that the crime was committed and the public must be protected from the offender is some form or fashion. Jail diversion programs have various tracking methods of offenders but they do provide enough freedom and opportunity for recidivism. Also, treatment services and incarceration do often work at cross purposes and unless integrated successfully can cause barriers to coordination and solutions (SAMHSA, 1993). One organization emphasizes treatment and the other emphasizes public safety and punishment.
In-prison and post-release vocational training and work programs evaluations have shown that they are considered to be most effective, as they greatly reduce the rate of recidivism. Steady employment and educational services are some of the main factors in delaying or preventing an individual from re-offending in the first three years following release. More reentry programs are using the comprehensive strategy in response to what research and evaluations have found. Comprehensive strategies are applied in the state and local levels of government, mainly relying on community-based groups to coordinate and provide services for those re-entering society. These programs usually start before a prisoners release and provide assistance in receiving employment, housing, substance abuse, and mental health
The current criminal justice system is expensive to maintain. In North America the cost to house one prisoner is upwards of eighty to two hundred dollars a day (Morris, 2000). The bulk of this is devoted to paying guards and security (Morris, 2000). In contrast with this, community oriented programming as halfway houses cost less than the prison alternative. Community programming costs five to twenty five dollars a day, and halfway houses although more expensive than community programs still remain cheaper than prison (Morris, 2000). Tabibi (2015c) states that approximately ninety percent of those housed in prison are non-violent offenders. The treatment of offenders in the current system is understood to be unjust. By this, Morris (2000) explains that we consistently see an overrepresentation of indigenous and black people in the penal system. Corporate crimes are largely omitted, while street crimes are emphasized (Morris, 2000). This disproportionately targets marginalized populations (homeless, drug addicted and the poor) (Tabibi, 2015c). The current system is immoral in that the caging of people is highly depersonalized and troubling (Tabibi, 2015c). This is considered to be a barbaric practice of the past, however it is still frequently used in North America (Morris, 2000). Another moral consideration is with the labelling of youth as offenders in the criminal justice system (Morris, 2000). Morris (2000) argues that we should see youth crimes as a social failure, not as an individual level failure. Next, Morris (2000) classifies prisons as a failure. Recidivism rates are consistently higher for prisons than for other alternatives (Morris, 2000). The reason for this is that prisons breed crime. A school for crime is created when a person is removed from society and labeled; they become isolated, angry
Overcrowding in prisons may cause prisoners to not receive the rehabilitative curriculums that they want in order to be reintegrated into society. This is the case in California, with individuals serving their prison sentences in jails, where they do not have the space to incorporate areas to hold the programs necessary for prisoners to assimilate back into society (KQED and Center for Investigative
Every civilization in history has had rules, and citizens who break them. To this day governments struggle to figure out the best way to deal with their criminals in ways that help both society and those that commit the crimes. Imprisonment has historically been the popular solution. However, there are many instances in which people are sent to prison that would be better served for community service, rehab, or some other form of punishment. Prison affects more than just the prisoner; the families, friends, employers, and communities of the incarcerated also pay a price. Prison as a punishment has its pros and cons; although it may be necessary for some, it can be harmful for those who would be better suited for alternative means of punishment.
...t of people who return back to a law breaking mentality after they get released from prison. When you release people instead use these alternatives versus confinement it is less of a waste of expensive resources, taxpayer’s money, as well as time. A medium between control and treatment needs to be met in all of the prisons, or jails. Some men or women need more strict conditions and supervision practices while others may just need more of the services that should be offered such as rehabilitation, and alcohol or drug prevention. Any of these options will not be easy nor diminish this overcrowding issue quickly. It will take time, patience, and cooperation with both the inmates or ex-offenders family, friends, courts as well as law enforcement and jails.
The past two decades have engendered a very serious and historic shift in the utilization of confinement within the United States. In 1980, there were less than five hundred thousand people confined in the nation’s prisons and jails. Today we have approximately two million and the numbers are still elevating. We are spending over thirty five billion annually on corrections while many other regime accommodations for education, health
Many changes are made inside the justice system, but very few have damaged the integrity of the system and the futures of citizens and prisoners. Although the story seems to focus more on lockdown, Hopkins clearly identifies the damaging change from rehabilitation in prisons to a strategy of locking up and containing the prisoners. To the writer, and furthermore the reader, the adjustment represented a failure to value lives. “More than 600,000- about 3 times what it was when I entered prison, sixteen years ago. In the resulting expansion of the nation’s prison systems, authorities have tended to dispense with much of the rehabilitative programming once prevalent in America’s penal institutions” (Hopkins 157). The new blueprint to lock every offender in prison for extended sentencing leads to an influx in incarcerated people. With each new person
Sung, L. G.-e. (2011). Rethinking Corrections: Rehabilitation, Reentry, and Reintegration. Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publications.
This paper examines the advantages and disadvantages of ex-offender reentry. Factors contributing to recidivism include law enforcement officers mistrust for reentry prisoners; lack of familial and community support; difficulties gaining employment due to criminal background, obstacles pertaining to housing. Factors that may reduce recidivism, increase public safety and facilitate ex-offender reintegration transitions, as well as detrimental factors of recidivism are examined. Lastly, the important role of parole officers for ex-offenders and the level of supervision ex-offenders receive are also explored in this paper.
Many people idealized the relevancy of living in a civilized world, where those who break the law are reprimanded in a less traditional sense of punishment in today’s standard. Instead of just doing hard time, programs and services could and should be provided to reform and rehabilitate prisoner. Despite standard beliefs, many individuals in prison are not harden criminals and violent offenders, many of these people suffer mental illness and substance abuse Hoke
“The history of correctional thought and practice has been marked by enthusiasm for new approaches, disillusionment with these approaches, and then substitution of yet other tactics”(Clear 59). During the mid 1900s, many changes came about for the system of corrections in America. Once a new idea goes sour, a new one replaces it. Prisons shifted their focus from the punishment of offenders to the rehabilitation of offenders, then to the reentry into society, and back to incarceration. As times and the needs of the criminal justice system changed, new prison models were organized in hopes of lowering the crime rates in America. The three major models of prisons that were developed were the medical, model, the community model, and the crime control model.
This model of corrections main purpose was to reintroducing the offenders in to the community. This Program was invented to help offenders in the transition from jail to the community, aid in the processes of finding jobs and stay connected to their families and the community. The needs of these individuals are difficult: the frequency of substance abuse, mental illness, unemployment, and homelessness is elevated among the jail population.