More handpicked essays just for you.
Juvenile recidivism after rehabilitation
Psychological factors underlying criminal behavior
Psychological factors underlying criminal behavior
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Criminal Justice Programs that Aid in Reducing Recidivism
Many things affect a person’s drive towards criminal behavior. Family environment, aggressive tendencies, substance abuse and lack of educational and vocational skills are examples of issues that can influence someone to enter into this type behavior and cause them to maintain a cycle that results in repeat offenses. According to studies conducted by the Bureau of Justice, more than half of the persons released from prison were rearrested within the first year of release, with the recidivism rate rising to 76.6% within five years of release (Office of Justice Programs, 2014). With recidivism rates rising, the cost to maintain the inmate population is daunting. It becomes a must to be proactive in finding a solution to reduce recidivism. Programs designed to reduce recidivism, most of which are derived from Evidence Based Programs (EBP), can impact these percentages in a positive way provided they are initiated and utilized efficiently.
Recidivism Reduction Programs in Juvenile Justice
Recidivism rates in juvenile justice vary from state to state but are comparable to those of adult and community corrections (Office of Research, Juvenile Justice Research Branch, 2010). Three main EBP that are effective in aiding recidivism reduction for juveniles is functional family therapy (FFT), aggression replacement therapy (ART), and multidimensional treatment foster care (MTFC).
Functional Family Therapy
For adolescent youth and their families, FFT is finding increased support among professionals (Sexton & Turner, 2010). FFT addresses behavior modification by the use of reinforcement and modeling that minimizes conflicts between family members (Welsh & Greenwood, 2015). A...
... middle of paper ...
...12).
Conclusion
In conclusion, the results provide insight into specific criminal justice programs that have aided in reducing recidivism rates. Although percentages have not decreased drastically overall, as more criminal justice organizations utilize evidence based programs and become more efficient at addressing individual’s specific needs, recidivism rates could realize a marked improvement. Research into these programs could save potentially millions of dollars each year, and more importantly, could improve the outlook of a person’s future. Broader research could contribute to additional programs that would reduce recidivism rates even further. The results of this study suggest that while these programs reduce recidivism when utilized properly, there remains a need for additional – and possibly new – programs to combat high recidivism rates.
Hinton, W., Sheperis, C., & Sims, P. (2000). Family based approaches to juvenile delinquency. The Family Journal, 11(2), 167-173.
Policymakers on the national, state, and local levels are always finding ways to improve the nature of the reentry process. The reentry process starts in correctional facilities and helps inmates prepare themselves for release and proceeds with their transition back into society as law-abiding citizens. In comparison to the average American, ex-offenders tend to be less educated, less likely to gain employment, suffer from substance abuse, or have been diagnosed with a mental illness. All of these aspects discussed are shown to be risk factors for recidivism, which is the tendency that causes criminals to re-offend. Generally, the offender reintegration process needs to be improved by properly monitoring the outcomes for reentry programs in order to return prisoners back to society safely.
Howell, J. & Lipsey, M. (2012). Delinquency prevention: A broader view of evidence-based programs reveals more options for state juvenile justice systems. Criminology & Public Policy 11(3), 515-523
Education has been proven to reduce recidivism rates and increase the success of an offender’s re-integration into society. In a study conducted in 1994 by the American Bureau of Justice Statistics, nearly half of the 302,309 released offenders surveyed in fifteen different states were convicted of a new crime within three years of their release. This data shows that prison fails to properly rehabilitate offenders, since after prison ex-convicts continue to live in a way th...
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. By helping unsteady criminals regain their health, society would see an exceptional reduction in the amount of crimes committed. Although some
For years now, incarceration has been known to be the center of the nation’s Criminal Justice Center. It’s no secret that over time, the criminal justice center began experiencing problems with facilities being overcrowded, worldwide, which ended up with them having to make alternative decisions to incarceration that prevent violence and strengthen communities. These new options went in to plan to be help better develop sentencing criminal offenders.
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.
Pearson, F. S., Lipton, D. S., Clel & Yee, D. S. (2002). The effects of behavioral/cognitive-behavioral programs on recidivism. Crime & delinquency, 48 (3), pp. 476--496.
In today’s society, many people commit crimes and illegal behavior is nothing new. Society knows that there are criminals and they have criminal intentions. The question today is not if people are going to commit crimes, it is finding the most effective method to help those criminals reenter society as productive citizens, and preventing new people from becoming criminals. Department of corrections around the nation have implemented a program that identifies the most effective method. The “what works” movement outlines four general principles that are implemented in the rehabilitation of criminals; and, these principles are risk principle, criminogenic need principle, treatment principle, and fidelity principle.
There are better ways to punish criminals and protect society than mass incarceration. The state and local governments should be tough on crime, but “in ways that emphasize personal responsibility, promote rehabilitation and treatment, and allow for the provision of victim restitution where applicable” (Alec, 2014). The government also succeeds in overseeing punishment but fails to “…take into account the needs of offenders, victims, and their communities.” (Morris, 2002: Pg. 1 and 2). Alternatives to incarceration, such as sentencing circles, victim offender mediation, and family conferences, can successfully hold criminals responsible while allowing them a chance to get “back on their feet”. Research has proven that rehabilitation has lowered the rate of re-offenders, reducing the crime rate, protecting communities and also saves a lot of
Introduction: Recidivism or, habitual relapses into crime, has time and time again proven to be an issue among delinquents, which thereby increases the overall juvenile prison population. This issue has become more prevalent than what we realize. Unless a unit for measuring a juvenile’s risk of recidivism is enacted and used to determine a system to promote effective prevention, than the juvenile prison population will continue to increase. Our court system should not only focus on punishing the said juvenile but also enforce a program or policy that will allow for prevention of recidivism. So the question remains, how can recidivism in the juvenile prison population be prevented so that it is no longer the central cause for increased juvenile delinquency? Simply put, we must create a means of measuring juvenile’s level of risk and in turn, form an effective rehabilitation program that will decrease their risk level for future recidivism.
We can all agree that an important goal of the American criminal justice system is rehabilitation. It expects that most, if not all, offenders to learn from his or her wrongdoing and become productive members of society (Ballenstedt, 2008). It is this thinking at the heart of a community-based initiative that is designed to bring law enforcement officials together to form a single concerted effort to identify and address patterns of crime, mitigate the underlying conditions that fuel crime, and engage the community as an active partner (Wolf, Prinicples of Problem-Solving Justice, 2007).
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.
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.
As a rule, offenders remain stigmatized as lawbreakers, they lose their supporting community (family, companions), their connections wind up noticeably broken. It makes it harder, if not nearly impossible for them to locate a better than average employment, enhance their life conditions altogether, fundamentally to avoid re-offending. With the investment of victim, offender, and communities, restorative justice strives to give those ready to take an interest a shot for an effective redo without the issues and barriers that are ordinarily brought up in criminal justice