Older Offenders in England and Wales - Term Paper Example

Older Offenders in England and Wales Older Offenders in England and Wales Introduction Generally, older offenders are defined in the UK as persons ranging between 60 and 65 years and are implicated in the criminal justice system. Practically, persons aged 50 may not categorise themselves among older persons, but is legally considered a suitable threshold among the group in recognition and acknowledgment of the realities they are faced with. Over the past two decades, the number of older persons that enter the criminal justice system in England and Wales has trebled, with those above the age of 60 currently being prison estate’s fastest growing age group (Walmsley 2009, p. 14). This fact poses various challenges to the criminal justice system mainly because older offenders, especially when in prison, are faced by a unique set of problems that is distinct from those experienced by younger offenders and prisoners. Since the public relies heavily on the media as the principal source of information related to issues of crime and justice, they end up having minimal accurate information and knowledge of the criminal justice system. Consequently, this leads to myths and a variety of notions being formulated regarding older offenders. Generally, the myths and notions opine that sentences handed to older offenders are too lenient; they underestimate the prevalence of crime by older offenders; they underestimate the participation of older women in crime; the public often thinks of violent or repeat offenders in their reporting of sentencing as being too lenient; the public has little confidence in the criminal justice system; and the public becomes less punitive when provided with more information (De Keijser, Koppen & Elffers 2007, p. 133). To this end, the purpose of this paper is to critically challenge such myths and notions and discuss how the older offenders are treated by the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Overview For the purpose of this discussion, it is imperative to briefly describe the criminal justice system of England and Wales. It is composed of the courts, law officers, serious fraud office, the police, ministry of justice, the home office, Her Majesty’s crown prosecution service inspectorate (HMCPSI) and national offender management service (NOMS) (Ditton & Farrall 2007, p. 227). In line with the objective of this paper, the two most critical functions of the criminal justice system will be viewed from the perspective investigation offences and how they treat offenders. In England and Wales, it is the responsibility of the police to investigate crime, collect evidence and make arrests or detain suspects, although some myths opine that they handle older offenders differently. In the courts, cases are heard and sentences passed and, just like the case with the police, there are myths surrounding the manner in which cases involving older offenders are conducted (Ditton & Farrall 2007, p. 238). Then, responsibility over several parts of the criminal justice system such as the courts and prisons is placed under the ministry of justice. Challenging the Myths There are many myths, misconceptions and notions about older offenders in England and Wales. Although the public has learned much about criminal tendencies by the older population, there is still a prevalence of lack of knowledge as to how they are treated by the criminal justice system. Most of the myths and notions surrounding older offenders and the way they are handled by the criminal justice system in England and Wales are founded on the lack of accurate knowledge of the criminal justice system and crime (Gelb 2006, p. 14). In particular, studies have shown that the public has extensive misconceptions about the extent and nature of crime as well as court outcomes when handling older offenders. Generally, the severity of practices of sentencing, such as the rate of incarcerating older offenders, is highly underestimated by the public, which also points towards the lack of accurate information about the criminal justice system. In contrast, this can be critically challenged by the fact that statistics from studies show the number of older offenders in prisons to have grown by up to three times within a period of 20 years (Walmsley 2009, p. 63). This also sharply contradicts the notion of the public that underestimates the rate of crimes committed by older persons in England and Wales. As a matter of fact, it is agreeable that not all offences committed by older persons are reported or published. However, records and statistics that show that they form the fastest growing group of prison populations in England and Wales is evidence that they do commit crimes. Therefore, the public’s underestimation of the rate of crimes committed by older persons is a myth. It is true that there may not be a crime wave by older offenders, but the public opinion that they are sentenced leniently in England cannot be supported by statistics and factual evidence (De Keijser, Koppen & Elffers 2007, p. 138). On the contrary, there are harsher practices of sentencing in England and Wales, such as the social attitudes directed towards older persons and technologically advanced detection like DNA evidence (Murdoch, Morris & Holmes 2008, p. 959). Presently, courts are more willing to pass custodial and longer sentences to older offenders for breaches of supervision orders and bail and also imposing intermediate sentences. Sentencing of older offenders is wrongly viewed as lenient because courts are exhibiting low tolerance of deviant conduct by older people, hence the readiness to send them to prison. The apparent increase in crime by older offender as evidenced by their growing numbers in prisons may in part be due to the tendency of persons living longer and, therefore, encountering more opportunities of committing crime. Then, the surge in prosecutions of historic offences rather than a wrongly perceived wave of elderly crime can also explain that older offenders are not sentences leniently. Further, the public opinion of underestimating the rate of crimes by older offenders may be based on the fact they do not encounter large numbers of the older offenders released from prison. On the contrary, this is mainly due to the fact that although more offenders are sentenced to prison, there are fewer mechanisms for early release and reintegration into society available to them presently as was the case previously (Mann, N 2013, p. 103). Surveys have shown that the public has more confidence in the police, or law enforcers, than the criminal justice system, especially the courts and prisons (Gelb 2006, p. 83). Again, the key reason given for this lack of confidence in the courts, prisons and the criminal justice system is lenient sentencing. Other reasons that have led to the drop in the confidence levels include the reliance of the criminal justice system on public confidence, which counters its intended purpose. This is because victims are expected to be confident sufficiently so that crimes and offences by older persons are reported in the first instance. Then, it is also shown that in the absence of cooperation of jurors, witnesses and complainants, prosecutions cannot be effective (De Keijser, Koppen & Elffers 2007, p. 150). In this sense, the lack of public confidence that is informed by inaccurate media reports on older offenders compromises their perception of the effectiveness of prosecutions. On the contrary, the growing numbers of older offenders makes them a significant minority that is generally accommodated in facilities designed for able-bodied and much younger offenders. In specific terms, the public opines that older offenders who commit sexual assaults target strangers. On the contrary, the victims are persons known by the offenders and are persons often considered as guardians, or even parents, of the victims. Then, the public tends to believe that most of the offenders are convicted after apprehension for the offences they commit. However, it is true that many older offenders charged with sexual offences are released under parole supervision or probation back to the community. It is also mistakenly believed that older offenders are only male. However, although it is agreeable that most are male, there are significant numbers of reports about offences committed by older women (Wahadin 2009, p. 33). Statistics by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons show that the number of women convicted for crime related to drugs has rose, albeit most of them being of foreign nationality (Wahadin 2009, p. 58). Women who are nationals of England and Wales are increasingly being convicted violence, either against a partner or child, often cause by depression and an enduring drug and alcohol problem. The concept of an enduring drug and alcohol problem, however, has led to another common public misconception that older offenders are led into crime by alcohol or drug. However, in contrast to that belief, studies have shown that older persons who would otherwise not have committed crime would not necessarily do so as a direct consequence of the consumption of drugs and alcohol (Wahadin & Cain 2008, p. 217). Treatment of Older Prisoners by the Criminal Justice System in England and Wales Generally, across several levels, the criminal justice system of England and Wales has given relatively poor attention to older offenders in spite of their rapidly increasing population (Wahadin & Cain 2008, p. 221). At the end of 2012, a report released by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons showed the prisons across England and Wales had 9,916 prisoners older than 50 and in this figure, those aged above 60 were 3,333 (Mann, N 2013, p. 101). These statistics present an inherent problem to ways in which the criminal justice system, and in particular the prison service, treats older offenders and prisoners. Ideally, it is the right of older prisoners to be entitled to the same degree of care like all other people in the community. In the policy environment, however, the older prisoners’ needs are not explicitly documented and met by the national policy currently in place, which lack a national guidance or strategy that relate to the older offenders’ general welfare (Falshaw, Tysoe & Lloyd 2009, p. 71). Although the provisions in the policy have a chapter that addresses older prisoners, they primarily focus on their mobility and health needs within prison environments. Human rights activists acknowledge that although investigations have found older offenders guilty of serious crime and protecting the public from them is imperative, it is equally important that the older offenders are not subjected to double punishment by substandard support (Wahadin & Cain 2008, p. 193). One area that has been receiving less than the required attention is the way older offenders are managed while in prison as well as the way their specific needs are addressed. Independent studies by human right groups that inspected 29 correctional facilities across England and Wales showed that in 2008 only three had policies that covered older offenders’ needs, while one only had a draft (Mann 2013, p. 104). As earlier mention, they predominantly focused on mobility and health, which was a requirement of the Disability Discrimination Act as extended to cover prisons from 2006. However, the downside is that this compromises, if not completely ignores, all other needs of older offenders that are outside the definition and scope of disability. For facilities that held larger populations of the older offenders, this was found to be of particular concern because there were no strategies or resources, whether long term or short term, to deal with the populations they already had. Out of the 29 facilities inspected, 13 lacked diversity policies and strategies and where they existed, they were highly underdeveloped (Mann 2013, p. 104). This is especially characterised by the lack of awareness with diversity issues coupled with the lack of engagement with diversity as regards older offenders. In other facilities inspected, older offenders were only met by diversity managers after they identified for themselves that they have special needs related to age that have not been addressed by the existing infrastructure. In some, the disability liaison officers doubled their responsibilities by being the sole staff members responsible for older offenders. Therefore, having two areas of focus places them under pressure yet they are already serving their stretched primary role. Essentially, this means that they end up concentrating to prisoners with disability at the expense of older offenders. One facility in particular in Norwich, in spite of having a unit dedicated to older offenders, has no policy in place for the older offenders yet they are held in the main prison (Mann 2013, p. 89). All these observations and results of studies show that the criminal justice system of England and Wales does not treat older offenders appropriately because there are no policies that identify and meet their special needs. According to HM Chief Inspector of Prisons (2004, p. 1), older offenders, in general, do not pose control challenges and problems to the prison staff. However, the old offenders’ own problems and especially as they age and become less able-bodied are significant challenges. Apart from being neglected and not necessarily by the prison staff but, rather, policy, the aspect of being less able-bodied in prison and the punitive jobs and activities they are sentenced to. Mainly, this is because prisons in England and Wales were traditionally built for younger and more able-bodied offenders. Even outside the prison facilities, the social environments present a challenge to the way the criminal justice system treats older offenders even to the extent of adding a gender aspect to it (Wahadin & Cain 2008, p. 112). This has led to a higher number of older offenders, especially women, ending up in custodial sentences rather than alternatives such as community sentences. For instance, community services that are available and suitable for satisfying community sentences are more suited for younger persons and, in particular, males and are often isolated in rural areas. Older female offenders in prisons have been reported to suffer more from illnesses related to age than do their male counterparts or even other females not involved with the criminal justice system because there are no appropriate policies for them (Wahadin 2009, p. 41). The result is that the needs of female older offenders fit uneasily in the criminal justice system that seems to have been designed for men. Prior to the Disability Discrimination Act, the only three prisons that had provision for older offenders’ special needs had resulted from local initiatives and not the criminal justice system. However, several others, albeit being isolate instances, have implemented minor adaptations including adaptable cutlery, ramps for wheel chairs and accessible telephones. To show how older offenders are not given proper attention, Mann (2013, p. 93) established that there is no comparable aspect of how they are treated in England and Wales and how they are treated in the US and Canada. Another area that has largely been overlooked by the criminal justice system is the reintegration of older offenders into society (Ditton & Farrall 2007, p. 240). By 2008, only four establishments were seen to contribute towards custom-made reintegration and resettlement of older offenders upon release, out of which one was an open prison and the other three trainers. Older prisoners ready for release from Channings Wood were helped in finding accommodation, and Ranby also did the same via external agencies but only for those with disabilities. Rye Hill also included older prisoners in reintegration and resettlement initiatives while Leyhil had a Department of Work and Pensions representative talk to every older offender ready for release (Wahadin & Cain 2008, p. 134). Apart from these four cases, the criminal justice system does not generally plan for the reintegration and social care concerns of older offenders whether prior to or after their release. In fact, the provision of these services to older prisoners has almost exclusively been left to health and social care programmes under the charge of other external agencies rather than the criminal justice system. Studies have shown that older prisoners have struggled disproportionately with resettlement mainly because of the distinct psychological changes they went through while imprisoned. Once they finish their time in prison, they are also faced with the challenges of reduced community support networks and the increased possibility of mobility and health concerns (Mann 2013, p. 81). The criminal justice system of England and Wales aggravates the already existing problems by stereotypically orienting itself with young male offenders at the expense of older offenders, both male and female. This has resulted in the restriction of the efficacy of prison programmes for the older offenders, yet their likelihood of reoffending or being a threat to the public when released is relatively low, especially with the availability of reintegration programs. The NOMS is a key component of the English and Welsh criminal justice, yet it works in conflict with older offenders’ attributes by not considering the reintegrative needs posed by this population (Ditton & Farrall 2007, p. 224). Studies conducted by the London probation areas’ officers established that programmes such as anger management will decrease the rates of reconviction of older offenders when incorporated in community rehabilitation initiatives. However, which is also an indication of the failure of the criminal justice system of England and Wales to pay attention to older offenders this is being done more by nongovernmental organizations as well as voluntary organisations. There may have been recent initiatives to bridge the policy gaps by publishing good practice toolkits, but studies still indicate a lack of cohesive strategies to address the needs of older offenders. Further, although the initiatives are an indication of attempts to make positive shifts regarding the attention given to older offenders, the lack of national funding and coordination is counterproductive against these efforts. So far, these issues imply that the treatment of older offenders by the criminal justice system upon their release as concerns reintegration is very limited, and this is further compounded by the fact that psychological reintegration is particularly challenging (Falshaw, Tysoe & Lloyd 2009, p. 79). Looking at this challenge from a gender point of view, the criminal justice system places women at a position of greater disadvantage than men. For instance, they earn less in employment than men, with older ones at twice the disadvantage since it is more difficult for them to find work. Therefore, custodial sentences for older women make it difficult for them to reintegrate and resettle in society upon release. This is worsened in cases where they were unable to work while in custody because of the system design being oriented towards males, which means they did not earn and save for their release. A significant trend noted in the way older women are treated is that the criminal justice system tends to move them further away from their homes as they progress towards their release date. This disconnects them from their families and making reintegration more difficult. Conclusion It can be concluded that the general public has developed myths and notions surrounding older offenders in England and Wales, who are persons aged above 60 and involved with the criminal justice system. This is usually as a result of overreliance on the media for information regarding the criminal justice system and the older offenders, which is usually inaccurate. The result is that the public falsely believes that older offenders are sentenced too leniently. The prevalence of crime by older persons is also largely underestimated, especially that of women. However, these myths and notions can be critically challenged because statistics have shown a steady increase in the number of older offenders being sentenced to prisons. These high numbers of convictions are not necessarily an indication of a wave of elderly crime but, rather, that they are not being sentenced leniently as wrongly believed. However, on its part, the criminal justice system has largely neglected the special needs of older offenders by the lack of national policy as well as funding and coordination for the cause. Analysed critically, the criminal justice system of England and Wales appears to have been designed for younger and able-bodied males. References De Keijser, J, Koppen, P & Elffers, H 2007, ‘Bridging the gap between judges and the public? a multi-method study. Journal of Experimental Criminology, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 131-161. Ditton, J & Farrall, S 2007, ‘The British crime survey and the fear of crime,’ Crime Prevention Studies, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 223-241. Falshaw, L, Tysoe, E & Lloyd, M 2009, Older prisoners in England and Wales, HM Inspectorate of Prisons, London. Gelb, K 2006, Myths and misconceptions: public opinion versus public judgment about sentencing, Sentencing Advisory Council, Melbourne. HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, 2004, No problems—old and quiet: older prisoners in England and Wales. London Home Office, London. Mann, N 2013, The experiences of an ageing male prison population in England and Wales, Ashgate Publishing Company, London. Murdoch, N, Morris, P & Holmes, C 2008, ‘Depression in elderly life sentence prisoners,’ International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, vol. 23, no. 2. pp. 957-962. Wahadin, A 2009, Older women in the criminal justice system: running out of time, Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London. Wahadin, A & Cain, M 2008, Aging, crime and society, Willan Publishing, Devon. Walmsley, R 2009, World prison population list, International Centre for Prison Studies, King’s College, London. Read More