ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION Valerie Hinton It is undeniable that mass incarceration devastates families, and disproportionately affects those which are poor. When examining the crimes that bring individuals into the prison system, it is clear that there is often a pre-existing pattern of hardship, addiction, or mental illness in offenders’ lives. The children of the incarcerated are then victimized by the removal of those who care for them and a system which plants more obstacles than imaginable on the path to responsible rehabilitation. Sometimes, those returned to the community are “worse off” after a period of confinement than when they entered. For county jails, the problem of cost and recidivism are exacerbated by budgetary constraints and various state mandates. Due to the inability of incarceration to satisfy long-term criminal justice objectives and the very high expenditures associated with the sanction, policy makers at various levels of government have sought to identify appropriate alternatives(Luna-Firebaugh, 2003, p.51-66). I. Alternatives to incarceration give courts more options. For example, it’s ridiculous that the majority of the growth in our prison populations in this country is due to slamming people in jail just because they were caught using drugs. So much of the crime on the streets of our country is drug-related--crime that would largely disappear if the massive profits brought on by drug criminalization were eliminated. You can reduce drug usage more efficiently, and at a lower cost, through treatment than through law enforcement. A. Community Justice and Restorative Justice –Restorative justice is an alternative to traditional court processing in that it seeks to involve offenders, victims, and ... ... middle of paper ... ... offenders who were “worse off.” As a result, local criminal justice officials are encouraged to evaluate their current correctional situation in terms of organizational impetus (are key stakeholders behind the initiative?), political culture (will new programs be supported?), and prospective clientele (what type of offenders are being targeted?) to identify the most appropriate program or approach. A common approach being employed by law enforcement agencies around the country to address these questions and identify problems is the utilization of the SARA model. SARA involves: • Scanning the social environment to identify problems; • Analysis of the problem by collecting data or other relevant information; • Response to the problem by developing and employing remedies; and, • Assessment of the remedies to evaluate whether it worked(Crow & Bales, 2006, p.129).
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.
Question 1. Both Thomas Mathiesen and Stanley Cohen argue that alternative criminal justice responses that were presented after the 1970s were not real alternatives (Tabibi, 2015a). The ‘alternatives’ which are being questioned are community justice alternatives generally, and Restorative Justice specifically. The argument here is that Restorative Justice cannot be a real alternative because it is itself finished and is based on the premises of the old system (Mathiesen, 1974). Moreover, Restorative Justice is not an alternative, as it has not solved the issues surrounding the penal system (Tabibi, 2015a). Cohen (1985) supports this sentiment, and suggests that community based punishment alternatives have actually led to a widening and expansion
In recent years, there has been controversy over mass incarceration rates within the United States. In the past, the imprisonment of criminals was seen as the most efficient way to protect citizens. However, as time has gone on, crime rates have continued to increase exponentially. Because of this, many people have begun to propose alternatives that will effectively prevent criminals from merely repeating their illegal actions. Some contend that diversion programs, such as rehabilitation treatment for drug offenders, is a more practical solution than placing mentally unstable individuals into prison.
It is easy to turn a blind I when there is no direct personal experience. Mass incarceration is an issue that influences other issues within the correctional system. The more people under correctional supervision means, the more individuals who can potentially be sexually victimized or placed in solitary confinement. Both are issues within the correctional system. Moreover, studies have shown that sexual victimization and solitary confinement have adverse side effects on inmates. If any of these variables are going to change for the better, then policy needs to change. Those in society, especially those with power who can affect policy in the penal system need to see these issues as a major problem. Some of the proposed solutions to reduce the incarceration rate and not new ideas, but a change in approach. Heroux (2011), suggested possible policy solutions to reduce the mass incarceration. Some of these solutions are earlier release, a change in mandatory minimums, transfer to non-institutions facilities, the diversion from institutional facilities, and doing away with mandatory minimum laws. This could be the next step towards reducing mass
In todays society the United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world. This high incarceration rate is due to the growing phenomena known as mass incarceration. This phenomenon has led to massive increase of people being placed in prison and the amount of money being used for these prisons. The book, Race to Incarcerate by Marc Mauer, focuses on mass incarceration as our default social policy because of the weak welfare state in the U.S. In the book Mauer discusses the causes and the problems with this policy.
Today, half of state prisoners are serving time for nonviolent crimes. Over half of federal prisoners are serving time for drug crimes. Mass incarceration seems to be extremely expensive and a waste of money. It is believed to be a massive failure. Increased punishments and jailing have been declining in effectiveness for more than thirty years. Violent crime rates fell by more than fifty percent between 1991 and 2013, while property crime declined by forty-six percent, according to FBI statistics. Yet between 1990 and 2009, the prison population in the U.S. more than doubled, jumping from 771,243 to over 1.6 million (Nadia Prupis, 2015). While jailing may have at first had a positive result on the crime rate, it has reached a point of being less and less worth all the effort. Income growth and an aging population each had a greater effect on the decline in national crime rates than jailing. Mass incarceration and tough-on-crime policies have had huge social and money-related consequences--from its eighty billion dollars per-year price tag to its many societal costs, including an increased risk of recidivism due to barbarous conditions in prison and a lack of after-release reintegration opportunities. The government needs to rethink their strategy and their policies that are bad
Restorative justice is a new approach that views crime as harm to people and the community. This process allows for communication between the victims, offender and the community effected by the crime. This is a way to promote accountability, and engage understanding, feelings of satisfaction, and a sense of closure. Restorative justice is a non-retributive approach. The restorative justice process includes, but is not limited to; victim-offender mediation, restorative conferences and circle processes. According to Wilson, Huculak and McWhinnie; the recidivism rate for those who were not conference within restorative justice process during their study was 43%, while those who were conferenced was 27%, (2002). They state that these statistics are promising, but at the time the article was written, there was a study underway to determine the effectiveness of the Canadian restorative justice process.
Incarceration is thought of as a positive form of punishment, and negative form of punishment. The opinion varies with the type of person, and their experience from jail if they have gone. Most inmates while in prison will tell you it is a horrible place that should be gone. That would allow criminals to be free and that would let them cause harm to others or other illegal activities. Incarceration was not designed to be a paradise, it is a detention center for the bad, and meant for them to be punished. Without jails the world would be filled with even more evil, and would leave people in more danger than they already are.
More are sentencing options are great because just like every person is different, so is the crime. Prison may not always be the most effective response for people, so If courts have options other than incarceration, “they can better tailor a cost-effective sentence that fits the offender and the crime, protects the public, and provides rehabilitation” (FAMM, 2011). Findings have also proven that alternative saves taxpayers money. “It costs over $28,000 to keep one person in federal prison for one year1 (some states’ prison costs are much higher). Alternatives to incarceration are cheaper, help prevent prison and jail overcrowding, and save taxpayers millions” (FAMM, 2011, para. 3). Lastly, alternatives protect the public by reducing crime. There is a 40% chance that all people leaving prison will go back within three years of their release (FAMM, 2011). “Alternatives to prison such as drug and mental health courts are proven to confront the underlying causes of crime (i.e., drug addiction and mental illness) and help prevent offenders from committing new crimes” (FAMM, 2011, para.
Few assumptions and questions guided my examination of this issue. First, I assumed that the gender of the incarcerated parent had to deal with the level of impact. The absence of the mother must be different from the father. Second, I questioned who would be taking care of the children while the parent's time in prison. Third, I assumed that formerly incarcerated parents would have difficulties taking care of the child after release due to their own mental recovery and other hardships, such as housing, food, employment, etc... Finally, what boundaries (physical, legal and economical) play a role on massive incarceration and thus in what ways effecting the children. In this paper, I will explain my re...
The “Tough on Crime” and “War on Drugs” policies of the 1970s – 1980s have caused an over populated prison system where incarceration is policy and assistance for prevention was placed on the back burner. As of 2005, a little fewer than 2,000 prisoners are being released every day. These individuals have not gone through treatment or been properly assisted in reentering society. This has caused individuals to reenter the prison system after only a year of being release and this problem will not go away, but will get worst if current thinking does not change. This change must be bigger than putting in place some under funded programs that do not provide support. As the current cost of incarceration is around $30,000 a year per inmate, change to the system/procedure must prevent recidivism and the current problem of over-crowed prisons.
As the purpose of restorative justice is to mend the very relationship between the victim, offender, and society, communities that embrace restorative justice foster an awareness on how the act has harmed others. Braithwaite (1989) notes that by rejecting only the criminal act and not the offender, restorative justice allows for a closer empathetic relationship between the offender, victims, and community. By acknowledging the intrinsic worth of the offender and their ability to contribute back to the community, restorative justice shows how all individuals are capable of being useful despite criminal acts previous. This encourages offenders to safely reintegrate into society, as they are encouraged to rejoin and find rapport with the community through their emotions and
“Restorative justice is an approach to crime and other wrongdoings that focuses on repairing harm and encouraging responsibility and involvement of the parties impacted by the wrong.” This quote comes from a leading restorative justice scholar named Howard Zehr. The process of restorative justice necessitates a shift in responsibility for addressing crime. In a restorative justice process, the citizens who have been affected by a crime must take an active role in addressing that crime. Although law professionals may have secondary roles in facilitating the restorative justice process, it is the citizens who must take up the majority of the responsibility in healing the pains caused by crime. Restorative justice is a very broad subject and has many other topics inside of it. The main goal of the restorative justice system is to focus on the needs of the victims, the offenders, and the community, and focus
Preventing criminal activity influences not only adults, but also all the children who grow up around it. If children are exposed to drugs and violence, they are more likely to be negatively influenced. Incarceration affects prisoners in a negative way. The current prisons systems in the United States are inefficient and horrible compared to the system in Norway. Prisons have to be a place for criminals to improve their way of life and become better people. Instead, the current system is increasing the recidivism rates which is causing crime rates to rise. Prisoners need to be given an opportunity to learn so when they are released they can provide for themselves. Additionally, alternatives must be established so that prisons have a stable plan to discipline criminals and reduce the number of repeat offenders. All of these things will lead to a more efficient prison and increase the chances of a better society. Prisoners must be more productive instead when they are released otherwise there is no point in sending them there. If prisons do not do this, there is no point of sending criminals or releasing them because they will never change their lifestyle. The prisons need to be reformed in order for it to become more efficient. There is no need to sentence criminals into unsafe living conditions if the outcome will be the same. Prison reform must be made until prisoners are released with the power and knowledge to make a positive impact on their life and the society they live
There are several different alternatives to incarceration for juvenile sex offenders. The most helpful is therapy. More often than not, a juvenile who commits a sexual offense does not understand that what they did was wrong, and they do not understand the consequences. Instead of being sent to prison, they should be sent to court mandated counseling to determine whether the child’s intent was innocent or malicious. That brings about the next alternative. Looking at juvenile sexual offense on a case by case basis.