The Parole Board: Ethical Behavior In Criminal Justice

Devin Johnson

CCJS 380 7980 Ethical Behavior in Criminal Justice (2162)

Case Study

May 5, 2016

The Parole Board

The chair of the parole board Robert has the responsibility of calculating the risk associated ensuring the inmates released back into society are not reoffenders. The first element that Robert has to take into consideration is the overcrowding of the prisons. The external forces of the court system is looking for the correctional units to expand or increase the mandates that the parole uses to release inmates. There is controversy surrounded in this case where the advocates are making demands for the expansion of the parole eligibility to release more inmates than expected.

Robert along with hi board identified that the mission

of the advocates may be accompanied with some negative actions. These actions are likely to void the purpose of the parole board in the correctional department. It is well known that some of the inmates who are released back into society are capable of being a reoffender. The reduction of the policies is one unintentional way of dealing with the policies (Fine, Torre, Boudin, Bowen, Clark, Hylton & Rosemarie, 2004). Robert’s concerns are connected with the fact that the restricted standards in the risk assessment is being altered. The governor has also made proposals that the parole board need to make a swift release of inmates in order to ease the overcrowding.
Robert is held liable for the actions that he takes when it comes to the decisions that the parole board makes when it comes to increasing the number of inmates released.

There are wo areas that Robert can take action in. The first area a motivating factor is influenced by the outside bodies associated with the federal justice system. Robert is only an actor in this case, it is likely that the chair of the parole board may insist on letting the federal lawsuit take action as he maintains the credibility of the parole board. From an ethical point of view, the governor proposed to renounce the mandate of the parole board in the risk assessment procedure. That is with regards to the process of selecting the most feasible inmates that can be released into society. That mesas that he will pave the way for ethical practices to take place. In this tie of scenario, the chair has the mandate to suggest alternate options in guaranteeing that the planned modifications in the required policies of allowing inmates to be released into

society.
The best answer to the governor’s solution should consider both effect on the situation. First, the chair should keep in mind the likelihood of the prisons or more inmates meeting the requirements of being release on parole. Arguments that lawsuits may be associated do not have an impact on the provisions in which the parole board operates (Fine, Torre, Boudin, Bowen, Clark, Hylton & Rosemarie, 2004). On the other hand, it is the obligation of Robert to respond with accuracy and ethical decisions. It is not suitable for him to operate on the possibilities and threats given to him by some influential person. The governor has to understand that the parole board has it mandates. It is, therefore, suitable for him to understand the parole board can only operate within the required mandates. This means the parole board does not endorse the release of inmates who are deemed risky to society. The risk assessment, portrays that the prole board gives the final judgement that is based on ensuring that career criminals are not retained. The federal suit is at the discretion of making a legislative mistake. Another alternate method of dealing with the overcrowding is to build new correctional facilities.
The Warden
There are several ethical issues that are following the recent changes in the financial provisions and work conditions. The financial support to William with the respect to the management of the correctional facility operations has been severely cut. Correctional employees getting paid overtime has been abolished. The decrease of the funds also means that the correctional facility dies not have enough funds for compensation or even increase the number of employees. The correctional facility problematic issue is the increase in inmates. The increased number of inmates within the correctional facilities calls for more staff and correctional officers to be hired. Also, it means that the procedure of supervising the staff and inmates becomes harder.
The moral dilemmas chosen, in this case, are associated with poor staffing and the circumstances surrounding it. The workers are denied the right wages associated with working overtime. It is likely that the workers are overworked in poor working environments. The law dictates that workers are only exposed to overtime work only if they are paid the proper wages associated with the responsibility. The issue worsens when the physical safety of the employees is threaten. All of these issues are related to the staffing problem. The wardens lack of a risk assessment that can help during the transiting inmates into the community based work is not helping the situation. Some employees tend to shoulder medical issues while others fail to show up for work. The warden has no choice, but to reduce the number of inmates within the facility. The warden is also faced with the increasing number of inmates in his facility.
There are two extreme options that the situation causes. The first factor is that of the reduced resources and benefits for the staff in the facility. The other factor is ensuring the security of the employees, community, and inmates. The problem of reduced benefits is a breach of the initial terms of what the employees agreed to work for. This is the reason some employees choose to resign under the frustrations of the working conditions that cannot be provided. The problem becomes worse because of the high turnover rate compared to the moment when the employee incentives were still place.
These choices are based on the warden’s hardship in maintaining the facility among a budget that is not adequate. The actor could assume that the best approach is to pave the way for the willing employees to leave due to frustration. The actor may assume that the facility paves the way for a number of inmates to be released into the community service program, which means some inmates may be reduced even though they are above the acceptable risk level. On the other hand, the warden may decide to work on a plan that will ensure the safety of the staff.
The correctional facility is the responsibility of William, who is the warden. The choices that he makes should be surrounded with an extreme reliable justification. The inmates must be well managed. The employee’s security brings the union representative to get involved. The impression about the problem of demand is that it is very difficult to achieve it in a short span because the finances are limited to support these projects (Pollock, 2013). Williams answer to the problem is extremely complex. The first angle is instilling a risk assessment plan that will reduce the likelihood of sending high risk inmates into the community. That will give a clear results of the inmates left in the facility as compared to the ones that transition into the community. The officers are guaranteed security in such case after the reduction of the number of inmates in correctional facilities. The warden has one challenge the retention of employees. The inmates can be used in order to ern resources that can be used as incentives for officers.
The District Attorney
Martha’s initial aim has been reducing the number of unnecessary incarceration of the citizens.

That means that there has to be a reduction in the number of arrest made on felons no matter the nature of the crime. Martha’s fear become reality after the mayor issues an order for agencies to arrest and prosecute drug dealers in the community. The number of inmates going to become high within a short period of time. One of the most ethical issues that should be observed is that of the superior giving and participating in the directive that one does not support. (Pollock, 2013). The circumstance that the mayor directs officers to decrease the degree of the manhunt is a win for Martha’s alternative provisions. The moral situation is that Martha intends to seek clear-headedness in the process of ensuring that the other substitute is

productive.
There are two strong motives that will either benefit or cause an altercation with the police. The first factor is rampant in the scenario where Martha is trying to fight the initial arrest of too many unnecessary citizens, because the inmate population is overcrowded. Negotiating with the officers could result in an open fire. She has to ensure that the mayor believes that Martha is part of the party that is locking down on drugs and arresting the offenders. The motivator holds this power since there is a hidden plan imbedded from within to help in accessing the vital criminals and release the common criminals whose records do not go beyond possessing.
The other factor is that case already filed have to go through prosecution. Martha hide her support for the plan while the most important mission is met with major security information. The encrypted information can be used by the courts and prosecution while a criminal case I pursued. The degree to which the Martha twit the case leaves the case set up for failure. The approach includes the three approaches including pleas, trial, or even dismissal.
Martha has the ability to provide the most ethical solution to the issue of decreasing inmates. She has to watch how she approaches it to avoid distorting the relationship between her roles and the security docket. It is possible for her to make room for the officers and the mayor in tracking down the drug dealers in the community and bring them to justice. On the other hand, she has to reach the next level that can determine whether they are sent to prison. She should support arguments about unnecessary imprisonment is leading to the overcrowding of correctional facilities. This will cause collateral trouble that the government is not in a position to fix at the moment. The basis behind this choice revolves around the argument that imprisonment of all the drug dealers cannot fix the issue of drug trafficking. The alienation of the compressed cases in the court is what’s best in this case.