Rehabilitation - Opposing Viewpoint - Thesis Example

Rehabilitation – opposing viewpoint  I. Introduction: Rehabilitation of criminals, in the recent times, has evolved sufficient discussion and controversy. Modern disciplines of criminology have provided a great deal of importance on rehabilitation of criminals so that they can come out of their intention to commit criminal activities and recognize themselves as an integral part of the social mainstream. Unfortunately though legal scholars and psychiatrists argue about effectiveness of rehabilitation dealing with intention to commit crime but there are several loopholes in the process that put a stop on it from being properly effective. As instances of such failure are gradually becoming more conspicuous with the progress of time, opinions against rehabilitating criminals are coming up. The main point of argument may be stated as follows - if rehabilitation could have really been effective then there would not have been increase in the rate of crime across the nation. Such argument definitely has a strong foundation. A 2007 Reuters report specifies, since 2000 onwards, total number of prisoners in the United States has reached to the optimum level. The report announces, “The United States, which has the most prisoners of any country in the world, last year, recorded the largest increase in the number of people in prisons and jails since 2000 …. It said the nations prison and jail populations increased by more than 62,000 inmates, or 2.8 percent, to about 2,245,000 inmates in the 12-month period that ended on June 30, 2006. It was the biggest jump in numbers and percentage change in six years. Criminal justice experts have attributed the record U.S. prison population to tough sentencing laws, record numbers of drug offenders and high crimes rates.” (Vicini) If rehabilitation could have really been effective then there would not have been increasing rate of criminal activism and society would have experienced a far more stable condition. Failure of the process has made the whole system a subject of vigorous questioning whether rehabilitation process of criminal should be retained or it needs to be abolished immediately. II. Arguability: Personally, I feel that rehabilitation is not, in any way, contributing towards changing the behavioral aspects of criminal, even after they undergo regular counseling process. There are certain reasons for me to pursue with such opinion. My basic argument concentrates on the issue regarding the use of a method if it fails to fulfill the purpose that it actually is designed to serve. It is becoming increasingly important for us to reach a specific point regarding rehabilitation as quickly as possible. In this context there are some important aspects to be considered. First, as there are several methods of rehabilitation, none is similar to the other. Among professionals it is not very clear how rehabilitation process for criminals can be executed properly. Second, the kind of effort (both intellectual and financial) required in order to develop the necessary infrastructure for rehabilitation, could have been used for other developmental purposes. Third, the ultimate outcome of such application has not yet provided any aspiring result upon which we can depend or dream about a better future. Historically, the issue of finding an alternative against punishment and capital punishment received attention since 18th century onwards. This very attempt gave birth to the introduction of prison houses as this method promised more humane treatment towards the criminals. The idea of rehabilitation can be regarded as the latest approach in this field but it is failing to satisfy the goal meant to be achieved. (Sechrest, White, Brown, 11) Moreover, amongst all the other correctional methods that have been experimented and adopted till date, none has actually been able to reduce the rate of crime. Primarily, we need to understand the basic truth that development of criminal behaviorist approach mainly occurs due to change at the level of social construction, which also happens dynamically in different times and phases. To some extent it is very much associated with human existence and cannot be reduced due to some external effort. There might be a certain momentary success but reduction in the rate of crime cannot be achieved permanently. III. Research Analysis: Argument: On methods Scholars of the Assembly of Behavioral and Social Sciences have clearly opined that rehabilitation and several other issues that are associated with it have widely been considered as a “medical model” for correcting criminal behaviorist approach among people - “According to the medical model, criminal behavior is like a disease that can be cured if the right sort of therapy is applied.” (Sechrest, White and Brown, 12) Rebuttal: On methods Is not the very observation quite contradictory in itself? Observing the situation from emotionally optimistic perspective the very phrase “right sort of therapy” provides us with ample hope but the moment we look at it with a practical approach we are lost within the darkness of bewilderment, as the “right sort of therapy” does not actually indicate any specific form of treatment. Both in human nature and psychological pattern of a person, methods of treatment also change. Such confusion not only put us in dilemma but also it prevails at an equal rate among all those psychiatrists, jurists, sociologists or criminologists, who are associated with application of such method of treatment. Such confusion may lead the society to find a concrete solution to the problem someday but when the ‘someday’ will come is basically a question unresolved. May be, even after investing so much effort, we will not at all be able to reach any specific solution. Trying to speculate over the future might be a great virtue but such speculation depends on the present. In this particular context, present is not giving us any result so that we may feel encouraged to stick to the goal of pursuing the path of rehabilitation. Argument: Adaptation of the Path Modern thinkers like Jacques Derrida have often tried to present that forgiveness is the best way to eradicate crime from the society and in this context they definitely have supported the view that development of criminal psychology is actually an organic process. Thus crime can only be reduced when people will realize the evil within their very existence. Such act of forgiveness can be associated with the process of rehabilitation as system of governance of a nation is not going to take any action against the criminal and will give him a chance for self-development. Derrida reflects, “the concept of the “crime against humanity” remains on the horizon of the entire geopolitics of forgiveness.” (Derrida; Rothfield, Fleming, Komesaroff, 16) Such observation that criminology is actually trying to follow through the method of rehabilitating criminals, definitely demands support at the level of universal humanism but ideas are perfect at the idealistic plain and should not be confused with current situation. In the name of rehabilitation criminals can be liberated. Rebuttal: Adaptation of the Path However, if such path is really undertaken, does society have the capacity to endure the loss inflicted by criminals until the change will automatically occur at the psychological or behavioral level of a criminal mind? How many of us are ready to come forward and take responsibility of the general people while they tolerate devastation caused by criminals for such a long phase of time? These very relevant questions remain unanswered because deep inside our heart we clearly know what situation we actually are in and what price we have to pay if we exhibit such tolerance till criminal minds change their way of thinking. Does it seem practical at all to forgive every single person who will commit crimes against us? If, at personal level we cannot do that how can we expect that society should give an opportunity to criminals to rehabilitate them through forgiveness? It is people’s fear or respect towards law that still is maintaining a harmony in the society and we must respect this system. Argument: On outcome Scholars of the Assembly of Behavioral and Social Sciences have realized that there are certain major loopholes in the system of rehabilitation. In this context scholars like Lee Sechrest, Susan O. White and Elizabeth D. Brown have mentioned clearly, “This critique of the rehabilitative ideal is persuasive for many reasons and particularly because crime and recidivism rates strongly suggests to the public that in general offenders are not being rehabilitated by current programs. Rehabilitation, it is commonly said, is simply not working.” (Sechrest, White, Brown, 12) Immediately afterwards the next question expresses their hope regarding successful implementation of the method - “But what if it did work?” (Sechrest, White, Brown, 12) Therefore, despite receiving any clear outcome of such method, along with the common people, scholars are also hoping that the method will show certain positive results. Rebuttal: On Outcome However, such aspiration does not have any strong foundation. To what extent this hope and aspiration may last unless we take certain initiative of our own to eradicate crime or criminal mentality? We have waited to witness positive outcome of rehabilitation but finally we have found drastic increase in crime rate. As we have not received any positive results till date, the time now has come that we take certain initiative of our own, for instance, clearly expressing our opinion against rehabilitation of criminals, to ensure better future for our forthcoming generation and us. Arguments and Rebuttals have mainly been focused over three issues, namely, methods of rehabilitation, adaptation of the proper path and outcome of such application. Comparing and contrasting between these issues I have attempted to support my argument that this is the high time we must provide lesser concentration over the issue of rehabilitation of criminals. IV. Audience: I consider lawmakers of our country as my ultimate in this context. Most of them think that rehabilitation of criminals is essentially needed because it will give opportunity to criminals to be identified as a part of the society. Generally, they believe that if system of punishment is abolished, the situation will be much better as criminals will receive a chance to live as a part of the society. Legislatures are actually representative of common people. As every human being wish to enjoy a peaceful social existence, it is quite normal that they would expect rate of criminal activism would stop. However, it is important to realize that abolishing criminal justice system and provisions of punishing a guilty person will not change the situation unless the criminal minds are not restrained. If we are aspiring for a better future, abolishing the system of punishment in the name of rehabilitation must be avoided. Unfortunately, abusing criminals in the name of punishment exists and such process needs to be stopped immediately. Such acts create a negative impact over human psyche and develop further antagonistic feeling among criminals. It leads them to commit acts of offence on a repeated manner. In this context scholars have observed, “Ensure the safety of every prisoner from abuse….Provide prisoners with opportunities to learn new skills. This is often done but we must make sure it is done universally.” (Correction and Rehabilitation) The system of punishment is actually aimed at giving caution to a person so that he does not indulge in offensive acts. Every time a person with criminal mentality feels like committing some crime, he will be reminded of the punishment or consequences of his actions. Punishing a criminal actually implies that a person will receive proper punishment for his crime and his basic rights will not be abused. V. Examining the Presentation: To represent the topic in an interesting manner I have adopted the procedure of addressing general conceptions that prevail in the society regarding benefits of rehabilitation. People generally believe that the system of rehabilitation is entirely full proof and does not contain any flaws. I have attempted to show that there are certain basic problems regarding the system of rehabilitation and we actually have become prejudiced regarding this issue, while we are supposed to take a very pragmatic approach. To support my arguments, I have cited four authentic sources that also have clearly indicated to the fact that there must be further development not only in the existing system but also at the level of general conception of people. Several other empirical evidences and survey results will be combined with this study in order to provide a better understanding of the point raised here. The focus point shall not be diverted from throughout the paper and the paper shall be structured according to the following sections: introduction, aims and objectives, literature review, methodology, findings and analysis and finally, conclusion along with suggestive measures. VI. Conclusion: Finally, what actually we are heading towards is not rehabilitation but we are putting ourselves amidst more dangerous situation. It has been seen that people having criminal mentality, even after pursuing rehabilitation do not actually change and they still contain the traits to commit crime on a repeated basis. We are therefore pointing fingers at the system of criminal justice and arguing that inhuman treatment of criminals is actually worsening the situation. We need to understand in the first place that legal method of punishing criminals does not imply inflicting inhuman torment on them. Punishment, without any abuse of their human rights is the sole option to restrain people with criminal mentality from indulging in acts of criminality. Thus, I feel rehabilitation and continuous experiments related to the process should receive less focus and we must concentrate more on developing our system of criminal justice.                       Works Cited 1. Brown, Elizabeth D., White, Susan O., Sechrest, Lee, The Rehabilitation of criminal offenders: problems and prospects, Washington D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1979 2. Komesaroff, Paul A., Fleming, Cleo, Rothfield, Philipa, Pathways to Reconciliation: Between Theory and Practice, Surrey: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2008 3. Vicini, James, “Number of U.S. prisoners has biggest rise in 6 years”, Reuters, 27th June, 2007, available at: http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2637053120070627, retrieved on: 14th September, 2009 4. “Correction and Rehabilitation”, 24th June, 2000, available at: http://www.geocities.com/athens/forum/7119/rehab.html, retrieved on: 14th September, 2009 Read More