Recidivism Rate In Corrections - Research Paper Example

Recidivism rate in corrections Abstract The study looks into the problem of high rates of Recidivism, defining recidivism as the practice of repeatedly committing undesirable behaviors by an offender. The literature review finds that the rate of recidivism has remained fairly constant over the years, raising the issue of the effectiveness of the criminal justice system to deter the re-offending of offenders when they are out of the prisons and correctional facilities. The analysis observes that the poor correctional policy formulation and the harsh prison and correctional facilities conditions, are responsible for the problem of high rate of recidivism. The study recommends that proper policies be formulated, while the administrators in the crime and justice system focuses more on deterring those released to the society from adversely affects of the harsh prison conditions. The study concludes with a recap of the major findings of the study. Introduction The practice of repeated undesirable behaviors is one that is not new to the justice system, considering that there have been high rates of re-arrests after individuals have either been arrested for certain offences, or after such individuals have gone through the correctional programs to rehabilitate them (Betz, 2011). The wider expectations is that; after individuals have been arrested and charged or rehabilitated for certain crimes, they are able to reform, and thus they are deterred from engaging in the same undesirable behaviors or crimes in the future. However, as it turns out, there is an eminent failure in the criminal justice system, considering that the rates of Recidivism have continued to rise, if the data contained in a report released by the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections is anything to go by. According to this data, 6 of every individual who have been released from the state prisons are rearrested within 3 years of their release (Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, 2013). This serves to show that the Recidivism rate from the criminal justice system is as high as 60%, a trend that is worrying, when the reality is internalized that the victims of certain crimes are likely to be faced by the same ordeals again and again. While Recidivism rate is defined broadly, it can combine the definitions of both re-arrests and re-incarceration, to mean the first instance of rearrest of inmates after being released from a state prison, or the first instance of returning to a state prison, after an inmate had been released. The essence of this combined and broad definition is that it eventually gives some chilling facts. For an act of crime to be considered as Recidivism, the re-offender needs to voluntarily disclose instances of previous arrests or convictions (Morenoff & Harding, 2010). What this means is that; the rate of Recidivism can even be higher than the recorded data, considering that there are some instances where the offenders may fail to disclose instances of previous arrests or conviction. Therefore, this discussion seeks to assess the rates of Recidivism under the literature review. Further, an analysis with a view to establishing the major causes of Recidivism, how Recidivism affects the society and why it needs to be addressed will form part of the analysis section, while how Recidivism can be controlled and the role the administrators in the criminal justice system play in mitigating Recidivism will form the recommendation section. Literature Review: The rate of the inmates returning to the state prisons after they have been released within the duration of three years has remained fairly constant over the last three decades, a clear indication that the criminal justice system has not been able to deter re-offending (National Reentry Resource Center, 2012). This occurrence is disturbing, not just because the correctional system has failed to be effective in deterring further crimes by those already arrested and charged for various crimes, but because the states continues to dedicate huge resources to the criminal justice system, to a tune of $52 billion every year (Pew Center, 2011). Despite the fact that the criminal justice system has established programs that are meant to enable the offenders rejoin the society once they are released from prisons, the fruits of such programs are yet to be seen. In a study conducted by the Pew Center between 1999 and 2004 in 41 states, the findings indicate that among the total number of inmates that had been released in 2004, slightly over 45% of them had returned to prison by year 2007 being the first batch of prison release, while the rate of recidivism for the second batch of the prison release was 43% (Pew Center, 2011). Among the 41 states that participated in the Pew Center study, 15 states reported that the findings had indicated an increase of 30% recidivism in 2007, a key indicator that the rate of recidivism could actually be on the rise, despite all the measures that have been placed to see the offenders change their undesirable behaviors and be reintegrated into the society. The rise in the annual prison budget from $10 billion in the 1980s to the current $52 billion is a change that requires to have indicated a reduction in the rate of recidivism and general crime within the society, considering that the commitment of such resources is meant to increase the abilities of the prisons and correctional facilities to establish and fund correctional programs that would rehabilitate the prisoners, and eventually deter them from committing further crimes once they are released from the facilities. Further, the report released by the Pennsylvania Department of Correction indicates that the state-wide re-arrests rate was 50% for all the inmates that were released from the state prisons and correctional facilities in 2008 (Pennsylvania Department of Correction, 2013). When such statistics are compared with the findings of the Pew Center study which found that the average rate of offender re-arrests from the 41 state prisons was slightly above 45% in 2007, the statistics then serves to indicate that the rate of recidivism could be on the rise, despite the fact that it has remained fairly constant for the past three decades. The report further indicated that among all the arrests made in the state of Pennsylvania, 10% are re-arrests of inmates that have been released from the state prisons at some point in their lives, while the rest is the arrest of new offenders (Pennsylvania Department of Correction, 2013). According to this report however, the rate of re-arrests appears to be higher in the urban areas, compared to the rural areas, with the rural areas appearing to have higher re-incarceration rates. The effect of this finding is that; the criminal justice system appeared to be less effective in the urban areas compared to the rural areas, considering the fact that the urban areas indicated high rates of re-arrests of offenders, yet lower re-incarceration rates compared to the rural areas (Pennsylvania Department of Correction, 2013). This means that the rural areas are more effective in charging and convicting crimes, while the urban systems are less effective, since those inmates who are re-arrested in the urban areas are not charged and convicted as highly as is done in the rural areas. In a fair and effective justice system, it is expected that the rate of arrests should translate to fairly similar rates of charging and convictions of the offenders. However, the fact that the urban areas are re-arresting more inmates than the rural areas, yet charging fewer of them means that there is a lapse in the criminal justice system in the urban regions, which requires to be addressed. Studies have indicated that there is a disparity in re-offending rates, based on the nature of crimes. Among the offences that are found to register a high rate of re-offending are the property offences, while the offences such as driving under the influence of drugs, rape and arson are found to be the least re-occurring among the re-arrested and the re-incarcerated inmates (National Reentry Resource Center, 2012). Additionally, the report released by the Pennsylvania Department of Correction indicated that the rate of re-offending also differs by the ages of the offenders involved, with the offenders of young ages being found to be re-arrested and re-incarcerated compared to older offenders (Pennsylvania Department of Correction, 2013). Nevertheless, the most interesting revelation about Recidivism is that; the first year after the release of the offenders is found to be the most crime-prone year, with most of the re-offending inmates engaging in crimes within this period. The Pew Center Study have indicated that while on average 45% of inmates are re-arrested or re-incarcerated within the first three years of their release from the state prison, the rate of those re-arrested and incarcerated within the first year of their release from prison or the correctional facilities is 50% (Pew Center, 2011). Further, the findings of the study have shown that the more an offender has been involved in crimes, the more the chances that such an offender is likely to continue with committing crimes, no matter the efforts that are made to deter such individuals from committing future crimes. In the report released by the Pennsylvania Department of Correction, among the offenders who have been involved in re-arrests or re-incarcerations in the past, those who have been re-arrested more than 10 times have a 60% higher chance of engaging in future crimes, compared to the individuals who have not been engaged in any other arrests, other than the arrest for the first offence (Pennsylvania Department of Correction, 2013). The same report further revealed that among all the re-arrests and re-incarcerations made for the inmates, 75% of the re-offending inmates are re-arrested for committing minor crimes, while only 25% of the re-arrests and re-incarcerations are for major crimes. Further studies have shown that the rates of Recidivism among the offenders that were paroled directly at home are lower than for those who were committed to criminal justice correctional centers (Pew Center, 2011). Analysis: The analysis of the data and statistics presented under the Literature review reveals the following: The major causes of Recidivism: Failure of the correctional policies The failure of the correctional policies to tackle the difficulties encountered by the prisoners both in the prison and after re-entering the society largely contributes to Recidivism (Tschirhart, 1996). From the statistics above, reports have indicated that the re-offending inmates who have been re-arrested more than 10 times have a 60% higher chance of committing future crimes, compared to an inmate who has committed an offence only once. The reason for this could be the fact that; the perpetual offender has been hardened by the prevailing harsh prison conditions, so much so that committing a crime is no longer a big issue. Alternatively, the perpetual offender may be isolated by the society every time the offender is released back to the society, such that he/she ends up committing another crime, since the only place the offender finds consolation or is adapted to, is the prison (Rhode, 2000). Discrimination of the offenders Discrimination of the offenders is another major cause of Recidivism. Most of the offenders who are released back into the society are discriminated in many aspects, such as in finding jobs, education opportunities, or even apartments to live in (Gendreau, Goggin & Cullen, 2003). Consequently, when the life becomes unbearable for the offender due to the discrimination experience, the offender is left without any other option but to commit another crime, which either results to a re-arrest or re-incarceration (Tschirhart, 1996). This explains the findings in major reports, that those offenders who are paroled directly at home have lesser chances of committing future crimes, compared to those from correctional centers, since the offenders paroled directly at home are not isolated or discriminated. Prison and correctional facilities trauma The trauma that an offender suffers in prison or in the correctional facilities is another reason that can impair the mental condition of an offender, through affecting them psychologically, thus causing them to commit other offensive acts that are not necessarily crimes, but which results to their re-arrests. This is explained by the fact that, the re-arrests and re-incarceration resulting from major crimes such as murder, rape and arson are lower compared to other minor crimes (Pew Center, 2011). How Recidivism affects the society and why it needs to be addressed Recidivism affects the society through the creation of a state of insecurity and despair, considering that the victims previously affected by the offences are not assured that the offenders will reform, thus they still remain insecure as they anticipate future crimes (Gendreau, Goggin & Cullen, 2003). Recidivism also affects the society through deprivation of resources in terms of huge budgets committed to the offender correctional systems, as well as loss of human resource through productive labor that continuously remains imprisoned. Therefore, Recidivism needs to be controlled, to ensure that such negative implications it has on the society, are mitigated. Recommendation How Recidivism can be controlled and the Recidivism can be controlled through the establishment of the right correctional policies in relation to the improvement of the prisons and correctional facilities conditions, to avoid the negative implications such conditions have on the offenders, such as causing them unstable mental conditions and making them hardened criminals (Betz, 2011). Further policy formulation in relation to the establishment of educational, job and housing of the offenders released from prison is required, to avoid their discrimination and isolation after they re-enter the society (Rhode, 2000). Role of the administrators in the criminal justice system It is recommended that the role of the administrators in the criminal justice system should be; focusing on incapacitating offenders, rather than punishing them for the offences already committed. This will help to deter the future committal of crime by such offenders (National Reentry Resource Center, 2012). Secondly, it is recommended that the administrators in the criminal justice system should play the role of repeated and comprehensive assessment of the offenders to determine those affected adversely by the prison conditions, by evaluating the offenders’ values, attitudes and behaviors before the offenders are allowed to re-enter the society (Pew Center, 2011). Conclusion Recidivism is the practice of repeatedly committing undesirable behaviors by the offenders who have been arrested or incarcerated. While it is expected that the rates of Recidivism should be reducing, owing to the huge amounts of resources that have been committed to the offender correctional system to a tune of $52 billion, the trend is different, with reports indicating that the trend has remained fairly constant over the last decade, or could even be rising. The causes of the consistent high rates of Recidivism could vary from discrimination, prison and correctional facilities trauma or the failure of the correctional policies. Thus, the problem of the high rates of Recidivism can be addressed through the formulation of the right correctional policies that alleviates discrimination and isolation of offenders, as well as the correctional system focusing more on incapacitating the offenders, at the expense of punishing them. The administrators in the criminal justice system have an important role to play, in ensuring that the offenders re-entering the society are well assessed for adverse prison and correctional facilities impacts, to ensure that they will not be forced to commit future crimes by such adverse effects, which may include trauma and mental disorders. References Betz, F. (2011). Managing Technological Innovation: Competitive Advantage from Change. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Gendreau, P., Goggin, C. & Cullen, F. T. (2003).The Effects of Prison Sentences on Recidivism. Centre for Criminal Justice Studies. Morenoff, J. D. & Harding, D. J (2010). Final Technical Report: Neighborhoods, Recidivism, and Employment among Returning Prisoners. National Institute of Justice (Washington, DC). National Reentry Resource Center. (2012). Principles of Recidivism Reduction. http://nicic.gov/Library/025735 Pew Center. (2011). Reducing Recidivism: Corrections directors in five states share lessons learned. Public Safety Performance Project. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. (2013). Department of Corrections' 2013 Recidivism Report. http://www.cor.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/department_of_corrections/4604 Pew Center. (2011). State of Recidivism: The Revolving Door of America’s Prisons. Washington, DC: The Pew Charitable Trusts. Rhode, D. (2000). Virginia departent of Justice. Retrieved from Virginia department of transportation: http//www.virginia.org Stanz, R. (2000). Predictors of Success and Recidivism in a Home Incarceration Program. Prison Journal, 80:326-345. Tschirhart, M. (1996). Artful Leadership: Managing recidivism Problems in Organizations. Indiana: Indiana University Press. Read More