The main purpose of this research is to promote the use of the theory of rehabilitation. It is to make sure that the order imposed on child offender is in line with the Child Act 2001. This type of principle seeks to bring changes to the offenders . The ultimate goal of this theory is to restore a convicted offender to a place in the society through some combination of treatment, education and training. This theory will help and support the offenders by utilizes the punishment with other way than imprisonment. It reduces the possibility of future criminality. This theory is essential in helping the child offenders because without this theory, practitioners and clients will be unaware of an intervention and their relationship to the causes of offending . As an analogy, theory of rehabilitation is like topological maps, they provide a comprehensive guide for navigating one’s way through the reintegration process . Example of rehabilitation that has been practiced in Malaysia is the program by Department of Social Welfare Malaysia which rehabilitation program for children in conflict with the law .
2.2.4.2 Legal view of the theory of rehabilitation
Most of the countries including Malaysia have been using the theory of rehabilitation but it has been used back and forth with the theory of deterrence depending on the matters at hand . According to Norval Morris and Frank Zimring in "Deterrence and Corrections", The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, the society has developed a motive in justifying punishment which is as a means of expressing society's retributive feelings as a method of inculcating respect for law and order and as a method of isolating high crime risks as a deterrent and as a mechanism for...
... middle of paper ...
...nd programme based on this theory as treatment to cure the disease. The truth is that this kind of programme is open-ended and does not deal specifically with the type of offence committed by the offender . As this kind of punishment is not harsh, the offenders are capable of manipulating that they are in a fast progress of recovering to serve for their interests . Other than that, this theory is not really effective for some criminals and they will tend to repeat their past conducts. They will never learn from their mistake as the punishment based on this theory is not harsh at all. However, this theory is more suitable in dealing with child offenders as it is still not too late to shape back their immature thinking. Different from child offenders, the adult offenders should be punished in harsher way which the theory of deterrence and incapacitation apply.
The RNR model was established in 1990 in an article written and published by Andrews, Bonta and Hoge, this article outlined three principles that made up an effective form of offender rehabilitation (Andrews, Bonta, & Wormith, 2011). These theoretical principles stated in the article include: The Risk principle of which states the matching of an offender and their risk to the level of the program (high risk = high intensity); The need principle- this refers to targeting criminogenic needs to reduce the risk of recidivism; The responsivity principle- this states to matching the style of program techniques to the offender and their learning style/ability of which include general responsivity (cognitive social learning) and specific responsivity (Andrews, Bonta, & Wormith, 2011). By following these rules, it shows that programs that follow the RNR model match the intensity of the program with the risk level of the offenders whilst also delivering services
All the laws, which concern with the administration of justice in cases where an individual has been accused of a crime, always begin with the initial investigation of the crime and end either with imposition of punishment or with the unconditional release of the person. Most of the time it is the duty of the members of constituted authorities to inflict the punishment. Thus it can be said that almost all of the punishments are an act of self-defense and an act of defending the community against different types of offences. According to Professor Hart “the ultimate justification of any punishment is not that it is deterrent but that it is the emphatic denunciation by the community of a crime” (Hart P.65). Whenever the punishments are inflicted having rationale and humane factor in mind and not motivated by our punitive passions and pleasures then it can be justified otherwise it is nothing but a brutal act of terrorism. Prison System: It has often been argued that the criminals and convicted prisoners are being set free while the law-abiding citizens are starving. Some people are strongly opposed the present prison and parole system and said that prisoners are not given any chance for parole. Prisons must provide the following results: Keep dangerous criminals off the street Create a deterrent for creating a crime The deterrent for creating a crime can be justified in the following four types Retribution: according to this type, the goal of prison is to give people, who commit a crime, what they deserved Deterrence: in this type of justification, the goal of punishment is to prevent certain type of conduct Reform: reform type describes that crime is a disease and so the goal of punishment is to heal people Incapacitation: the...
Incapacitation is a form of punishment that removes an offender from society. This model protects the public by getting the criminals off the street. Deterrence is implemented by punishing a person and using them as an example to deter others from criminal activity or through punishment that deters the individual from committing further acts. Rehabilitation is a prevention model that avoids future criminal activity of an offender by providing treatment and teaching them how to correct their path. Utilitarianism is consistent with preventative models of punishment and suggests that offenders act rationally and punishment that lowers crime will benefit society and outweighs individual harm.
A growing number of probation officers, judges, prosecutors as well as other juvenile professionals are advocating for a juvenile justice system which is greatly based on restorative justice. These groups of people have been frustrated by the policy uncertainty between retribution and treatment as well as unrealistic and unclear public expectations. As a primary mission, the balanced approach or policy allows juvenile justice systems together with its agencies to improve in their capacity of protecting the community and ensuring accountability of the system and the offenders . It enables the youths to become productive and competent citizens. This guiding philosophical framework for this policy is restorative justice as it promotes the maximum involvement of the community, victim, and the offender in the justice process. Restorative justice also presents a viable alternative to sanctions as well as interventions that are based on traditional or retributive treatment assumptions. In the policy proposal for restorative justice, the balanced approach mission assists juvenile justice system in becoming more responsive to the needs of the community, victims, and the offenders . Therefore, this paper considers how restorative justice reduces referrals of juveniles to criminal and juvenile justice systems and gives a proposal on the implementation of restorative justice in the community together with a number of recommendations. For instance, preliminary research reveals that application of restorative justice in schools significantly reduces school expulsions, suspensions, and referrals to the criminal justice systems. Restorative justice programs are an alternative for zero-tolerance policies for juveniles or youths .
The purpose of the criminal law is to balance of rights for individuals in society to achieve justice. The criminal law is continually reforming in an attempt to achieve justice for young offenders, as it is an issue of the criminal law. This essay will examine the effectiveness of the criminal justice system in relation to young offenders therefore looking at various aspects of the juvenile justice system. The criminal justice system does provide some effective and relevant concessions for young offenders. However, due to its focus on incarceration and punishment rather than on preventative measures, the criminal justice system is effective to an extent
The problem of dealing with juvenile justice has plagued are country for years, since the establishment of the first juvenile court in 1899. Prior to that development, delinquent juveniles had to be processed through the adult justic3e system which gave much harsher penalties. By 1945, separate juvenile courts existed in every single state. Similar to the adult system, all through most of the 20th century, the juvenile justice system was based upon a medical/rehabilitative representation. The new challenges of the juvenile court were to examine, analyze, and recommend treatment for offenders, not to deliver judgment fault or fix responsibility. The court ran under the policy of “parens patriae” that intended that the state would step in and act as a parent on behalf of a disobedient juvenile. Actions were informal and a juvenile court judge had a vast sum of discretion in the nature of juvenile cases, much like the discretion afforded judges in adult unlawful settings until the 1970s. In line with the early juvenile court’s attitude of shielding youth, juvenile offenders’ position was often in reformatories or instruction schools that were intended, in speculation, to keep them away from the terrible influences of society and to encourage self-control through accurate structure and very unsympathetic discipline. Opposing to the fundamental theory, all through the first part of the century, the places that housed juveniles were frequently unsafe and unhealthy places where the state warehoused delinquent, deserted, and deserted children for unclear periods. Ordinary tribulations included lack of medical care, therapy programs, and even sometimes food. Some very poor circumstances continue even today.
Handling a young fragile mind can be difficult; but studies have shown therapeutic rehabilitation is key in not causing unrepairable damage. The majority of youth offenders has been exposed to harsh environments and rough upbringings. Years of exposure to violence and neglect can create a sort of brain-washing. It is imperative to focus on important aspects of life in order to transform the mind of the juveniles. An efficient method that involves keeping the juvenile in the community is referred to as multisystemic therapy. “Multisystemic therapy is an intensive therapy program which focuses on numerous aspects the delinquent’s life: family, school, social and other unique factors which may relate to the behavior” (May, Osmond, and Billick 298). When using the multisystemic approach juveniles decrease association with other delinquents, juvenile and adult. The therapeutic method gives an individual approach on focusing deeper on the root issues and helps the juvenile renew their minds and thought process. In the end, adopting multisystemic therapy decreases the likelihood of the youth continuing in a criminal
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...
Enforcing death penalty in itself deters people from getting suitable opportunity to ensure that rehabilitation is enhanced. It is necessary to note that many individuals who have been charged with capital punishment have been emotionally and psychologically unstable. Enforcing the death penalty therefore denies them room for rehabilitation. There is a need to advance towards rehabilitation as opposed to advocating for execution. If individuals know that upon committing a capital offence they will be sentenced to death, they will hardly consider reform programs. It is also crucial to note that there is no concrete evidence on advantages derived from the death penalty. The truth is that it only aids in perpetuating death and chains of violence. Prisons should serve as centers to rehabilitate violent fellows, and then return them to the community as fully reformed and responsible individuals. It is therefore not justifiable that a death penalty should be enforced to them at all
As discussed in depth, there are all types of crimes that are committed by young offenders these days and the offenders possess a number of different characteristics. There have been many theoretical crime explanations that have been formed over the years that attempt to explain the reasoning behind the question of why certain individuals, both young and old, are more prone to commit crimes. The discussion of punishment practices are also important because it displays the many approaches that have been taken to ensure that juvenile delinquents are being treated fairly, but punished and rehabilitated all simultaneously. Many methods fall under this kind of approach referred to as the restorative justice approach such as neighborhood conference committees, victim impact panels, sentencing circles, and community impact panels which all attempt to rehabilitate the offender, but also to involve members of society including the victims/survivors of crimes (Siegel, 2009). It is believed and hoped with the continuation of processes, practices, and programs in place such as these that juvenile crime will eventually decrease bringing more order to our society as a whole. Overall, this paper strives to bring awareness to juvenile delinquency by
In conclusion, the development of the juvenile justice system resulted from social development and human needs. By modifying and integrating, the legal authorities have made the legal system more efficient and just for the young people, providing that necessary punishments are executed for the criminal acts while protections are given to the ordinary youth. It is believed that the stability of a society depends on a sound justice system.
This model of corrections had an excellent goal in helping criminals to recover from whatever caused them to commit crimes. The positive side of this program is twofold. First the program would help the ill to recover and secondly it was supposed to stop the criminal from re-offending. Although this program seems to be a great idea there are also downfalls to the idea. The main problem with this program is how you would evaluate the persons illness. For example, if someone was caught stealing or selling drugs, how do you determine that they have some sort of fixable problem or illness? Maybe they were just hungry or wanted money and there is nothing wrong with them that can be treated psychologically. Another example of a problem with this system is how woul...
A common focus of rehabilitation states that “criminality is a disease that can be cured”. The theory states that many offenders who are let into rehabilitation are usually treated with medical or drug treatments. The rehabilitation sentencing theory is mainly only given to children and or first-time offenders and not repeat offenders because they obviously have not learned from their past mistakes and have no hope left. The mentality is to find people who are capable of being cured and are able to get another chance in life. Finally, restorative justice is the theory of rehabilitating the victims and not the offenders. While rehabilitation mainly focuses on the offender, restorative justice focuses on getting the offender and victim together to be able to change and address the damage that was done. The goal is to remove the harm done to the victim by having them work together in the hope of
I thought it was better to define what behavior therapy is, in order to better understand it. Many publications have their own interpretation but the common theme is, behavior therapy is observing a patients behavior from a therapeutic approach. Behavior therapy has a variety of techniques that include reinforces, conditioning techniques, behavioral modification and systematic desensitization. These techniques are used to change the undesirable behavior.
Mental health refers to the state of individuals psychologically, emotionally and socially. Mental health affects a person’s emotions, feelings, thoughts, and sections when exposed to different situations. Furthermore, mental health is responsible for a person’s reaction to stress and other social conditions. Generally, mental health affects how a person relates to others and their ability to understand and interact with them. Therefore, problems that affect a person’s mental health affect the abilities to socialize, their feelings, moods, reaction to situations. The person experiencing mental health problem may portray different behaviors when confronted with different issues. Mental health issues have several