Involuntary Clients and the Changes in Correctional Philosophies - Research Paper Example

Question1: Involuntary clients and the changes in Correctional philosophies Working with involuntary clients is sometimes inevitable. This makes it possible to devise strategies in which one can be able to handle them. Determining the right approach to an involuntary client is very important. In most cases, the client may feel coerced and hence may perceive the session as a waste of their time. As a result, they may be rebellious and unwilling to provide any substantial information when being assessed. Therefore, I think that when examining an involuntary client, their state of being should be placed into context as well as their personality. This helps in understanding the client and possibly their preferences. Behavior is a very important component that should be clearly understood for an involuntary client. It is possible that the client will be wittier that the worker, this means that the worker should attempt to understand the client as fast as possible. If not careful, an involuntary client can easily be aggravated, and hence may end up being very aggressive. The results may not be pleasant. I concur with the proposition that, the worker should bear in mind that not all clients will be willing to cooperate (Trotter, 2006). What this means is that the worker should always be prepared to confront rebellion, therefore the need for tact. It is important to understand why the client exhibits the behaviors that he does. Despite it being a daunting task to deal with an involuntary client I find the some steps very realistic and helpful. When the air is cleared, then the client is certain of what you are up to, then when one identifies a legitimate interest for the client, the client is able to relate with that very well. It will possibly draw the client to the worker. On the other hand, the identification of aspects that requires intervention places the client in a situation where they are obliged to listen and follow keenly what the intervention relates to. Further, other negotiable aspects are introduced hence the client gets a platform to also present their input and concerns. After the negotiations are done, then there is an agreement on the execution of the way forward, which gives the light of how the deliberations will be executed (Trotter, 2006).. By all possible means, the involuntary client should be made to cooperate. The changes in the correctional philosophies has been a great strategy that ensures that the societal needs are placed first. As noted by Mackenzie (2012), since the mid-20th century, there has been many changes in the correctional strategies that have been implemented in the United States. Correction of offenders should be objective, taking into concern the prevailing needs in the society, when the needs change, and then there is also the need to change the correctional philosophy as it has happened in the past. Rehabilitation was a philosophy that was embraced for a long time in the United States. It was done for almost the first seven decades of the twentieth century (Mackenzie, 2012). I believe this is a philosophy that made a lot sense during that time because the needs by then were mainly to have society that conforms to the law; it may have happened that some citizens did not understand the law, hence required to be supported to become law-abiding citizens. Comparing with the current setup, citizens have become quite familiar with law and break it consciously, rarely due to ignorance. Rehabilitation was also a strategy that ensured even the marginalized communities that engaged in intensive crimes get to earn and transform. In the current America society, marginalization has been fought and people have clearly understood their rights. The philosophy shifted to fairness and justice, which was a model that was facilitated by the mid-20th century changes in America. US experienced quite a number of changes during this period, such as calls for equality, fighting of racism, rose of feminism and technological developments among other factors. These aspects might have made it possible for other changes to be implemented such as the change in the correctional philosophy. Afterwards came the crime control model, which was now a more advanced philosophy. The previous model that gave people the leeway to engage in crime while having justice and fairness prevail in the process of correction might have contributed this philosophy. Therefore, there was the need to develop a crime control correctional philosophy that would prevent individuals from committing crime or reducing the chances of recidivism. The changing times that have led to a higher level of civilization and enlightenment has promoted the changes. Question 2: Different types of correctional Philosophies Intermediate Sentencing and Rehabilitation This is one of the oldest philosophies that was adopted by the United States government at the beginning of the 20th Century. It was the work of the legislature to determine the highest level of punishments. However, the courts were responsible for giving sentences. On the other hand, the correctional officers gave the furloughs, good-time and earned-time while the date of release was determined by a parole board. Once the judges made a sentence, the parole board and the correctional officials had the full mandate to correct the offenders. The philosophy had two components, intermediate sentencing was a strategy that set a form of sentencing that was customized according to an individual. The individual needs of the offenders were looked at with an objective of ensuring that the individual left the prison rehabilitated. The correctional officials were given an open-ended mandate that ensured that once the criminals left the prison, recidivism would not occur(Alleman, 2002). This philosophy was also geared towards protecting the offenders against severe punishment hence capable of transforming to become law-abiding citizens. This form of correctional philosophy was based on the need to change the environment as well as the psychological view of the offenders. Justice and Fairness Philosophy In this philosophy, the proposition was that justice and fairness needed to be provided. This means that the punishment was made relative to the crime. The offenders were supposed to bear as much consequences as the magnitude of the crime committed. It was based on the criminal’s record as well as the conviction for a given crime. The initial system that treated all offenders equally was to be done away with and treat a criminal in accordance to the crime committed and the level of recidivism. While the philosophy provided for the fairness in crime treatment, the offenders were also required to be treated fairly throughout the criminal justice process (Mackenzie, 2001). This brought the aspect of the rights of inmates. The type of punishment that the offender was to get was to be relative to their criminal record as well as the current crime committed. Crime Control Philosophy This philosophy developed after the fairness and justice philosophy involved two aspects of controlling criminal activities; incapacitation and deterrence (Mackenzie, 2001). This philosophy was facilitated by the rise in the criminal activities under the rehabilitation philosophy which seemed be so lenient to the criminals. This strategy was to be a tougher mechanism of combating criminal activities while restricting the correctional officials as well as the judges from being so soothing to the criminals. Incapacitation involved the incarceration of the criminals, which would limit their engagement in criminal activities. The length of incarceration was to depend on the crime committed so that the individual gets to be separated from other people since they are a risk to the society. Incarceration was therefore, established as the best means of controlling crime (Alleman, 2002) References Mackenzie, D.L. (2001). Sentencing and corrections in the 21st Century: Setting the stage for the future. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/189106-2.pdf Alleman, T. (2002). Correctional philosophies; varying ideologies of punishment. Retrieved from http://wps.pearsoncustom.com/wps/media/objects/3340/3420406/CJ445_Ch3.pdf Trotter, C. (2006). Working with Involuntary clients. Sage Publications. Mackenzie, D.L (2012). What works in corrections. Cambridge University Press. Read More