Importance Of The Factors Associated With Recidivism - Term Paper Example

Importance Of The Factors Associated With Recidivism Abstract Recidivism is defined as the act of repeating undesirable behavior even after an individual has faced punishment or other negative consequences for it. It is s major concern for judiciary and governments as the prosecution and sentencing of a criminal is deeply impacted by the chances of recidivism occurring after rehabilitation programs and trainings have been made available. Almost 2/3 of paroled prisoners are rearrested for the same kind of felonies in the United States. Finding out the triggers of recidivism is an important research area as it can help identify high-risk individuals. The literature review on research done so far shows a greater trend of recidivism in sexual offenders who faced harsh conditions and abuse during childhood leading to long lasting trauma and emotional instability. Hostility, anti-social behavior and substance abuse have also been proved to be predictors of recidivism among offenders. Juvenile delinquents who are exposed to criminal elements are also greatly affected by ‘peer pressure’ and are at greater risk. Research done on women inmates supports these conclusions. Besides the environment factor, personality traits and mental conditions have been linked to the phenomena with psychopathy as one of the leading causes of violent recidivism. While psychopathic individuals cannot be helped by structured rehabilitation programs, many of the other risk factors are changeable. Assessment of risks should be done on basis of structured judgment using empirical actuarial methods, clinically adjusted actuarial or professional judgment. Correct evaluation can differentiate between high-risk and low risk offenders who may be treated according to their different requirements through behavioral programs which directly target the criminal factors. Factors affecting recidivism Recidivism is the social occurrence identifying the relapse of a person in acting out the same kind of undesirable behavior who had been previously punished for or had to face negative consequences because of. Recidivism is an anomaly in that its normal behavioral patterns suggest that after suffering because of their actions the people will not be motivated to repeat those actions as there could be no possible benefit; negative reinforcement would have effectively reduced their desire for the actions which are harmful for innocent individuals and the society at large. However, as crime and prison statistics indicate, recidivism is rampant among inmates and criminals after they have been released from their sentences; in the United States almost 2/3 of all criminals are rearrested or found guilty of further misdemeanors after they had been released (Salgado, 2007). Often criminals return to the same kind of offence they were initially prosecuted for but at times their tendencies turn towards other kind of crimes and recidivism occurs with regards to the criminal mindset. Recidivism is a major problem for the judiciary; one of the main purposes of the prison system is to ensure that criminals are rehabilitated and can be sent back as productive citizens of the society. Structured programs are often in place along with therapy or psychotherapy analysis to provide the offenders with the learning and self control required to control their tendencies towards crime but the high occurrence of recidivism shows that these programs often do not succeed in their purpose. For the judiciary and other interested research fields it is very important to be able to identify those inmates or juvenile delinquents who are at high risk of recidivism and the factors which are responsible for that. Often prison sentences and conditions are designed according to the perceived threat that the criminal poses to the civil society and recidivism is one of the main concerns of those involved with law and order – they cannot let a criminal loose in the society who would revert back to his dangerous ways. If the factors of recidivism are known, it can be found out if they are changeable or not, leading to more empathically designed programs to curb the phenomena among the criminals. There has been ample research on identifying the main causes of recidivism, the controls which should be provided for it and on how to evaluate the risk of recidivism for an individual. Much of the initial research has been focused on sexual offenders and their histories as these people have the largest rates of recidivism observed. In the paper authored by Kinston and his team they analyzed the data on incest offenders finding out that by the XIX century (mean10.78), 9.8%, 20% and 27.5% of incest offenders were charged or convicted of a sexual, violent or criminal offence, respectively.(Kingston et al., 2008). The paper also gives the characteristics of these repeat offenders classifying sexual recidivists as having higher psychopathy scores than non-recidivists. It was also stated that factors like alcoholism, hostility, and a disturbing family history or prior sexual abuse were also present in a significant rate for these people. The correlation of hostility with sexual and violent recidivism has been further studied in detail. When examined by type of offender, hostility was significantly associated with recidivism in intrafamilial and extrafamilial child molesters (Firestone et al., 2005). For sexual deviants the factors leading to recidivism do not come as a shock to anyone. People who suffer through a young life from sexual abuse without the safety net of a stable and supportive family will more likely have a darker and unfair view of the worlds and with a desire to get justice, which in their disturb minds could very well take the form of inflicting the same kind of suffering on others. The trauma they suffer is not something which can easily be removed through punishment or negative reinforcement and the effects of that trauma are far reaching. Punishment and isolation in most cases will not dissuade them or change their mindset towards those crimes. Hostility as a learned or inherited trait can also goad these offenders towards repeating their misdemeanors, as anger can frequently override any other emotions or rational thoughts and unless the offenders were taught how to control their hostility and why was it necessary to do so they would very likely succumb to their violent natures when given a suitable stimulus. The conditions are not much different for women offenders either. It has been discovered that while family, origin (race or ethics), environmental or economic conditions are not factors which directly affect the chances of recidivism, the lack of a supportive family structure during childhood and sexual abuse at a young age are good predictors of future recidivism of undesirable behavior even after being punished by law (Salgado, 2007). For these women their chances of a complete rejection of the criminal lifestyle also depended on the kind of exposure they got to correctional systems through family and friends; those who were able to build sincere relationships with positive, anticrime influencers had a much better chance of returned to a lawful life. The opposite is true as well, offenders moving in mainly criminal circles after release from prison or similar were at a high risk of recidivism showing the impact of peer pressure. The peer pressure or peer learning factor holds great significance with regards to juvenile delinquents. In the study conducted by the Oregon Youth Authority, they attempted to isolate the criminal and non criminal activities which indicated the chances of recidivism in youthful offenders. The purpose of the study was to suggest corrective measures for the youth currently involved in these high risk activities. In line with prior research some of the factors isolated were: total prior misdemeanor referrals, total prior theft referrals, total prior drug or alcohol referrals, total prior runaway referrals, and total prior felony referrals; again painting the picture of a life spent without affection, stable relationships or any adult supervision, and acquaintances who would influence ‘wrong’ behavior like drug intakes and alcoholism. The research had a confidence of AUC (area under the curve) of 0.72, showing accurate results and conclusions (Oregon Youth Authority, 2011). Substance abuse and alcoholism also play a significant part in recidivism of petty crimes. Addictions are rarely easy to finance and for young offenders it is not uncommon for the motivation of the first crime to be monetary gain. Unless these criminals are rehabilitated and given treatments, it is quite expected that they may relapse into the same behavior to fund their physiological needs for the illegal substances. A report released in 2009 from California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) gave proof of a considerable decrease in recidivism for offenders who were a part of in-prison substance abuse programs and had access to a community-based substance abuse treatment. The possibility is even higher if the individuals in question suffer from an antisocial personality; it is difficult to form friends and a supportive network for such people and they have a low desire to assimilate back into the society. Personality traits may have an effect on this too, as different individuals respond differently towards substance abuse and interpersonal relationships and, likewise, treatments designed with extroverts in mind may not be as effective for introverts and rates of recidivism for these offenders will likely fluctuate with their personalities. As far as psychological factors go, the relationship between psychopathy and recidivism has been noted by many scholars. Psychopathy can be defined as “a personality disorder characterized by an abnormal lack of empathy combined with intensely amoral conduct” (Stine, 2010). The people who suffer from psychopathy are proficient at ‘acting normal’ and blending into the civil society; they can portray normal emotions and even make people feel sympathy for them after they have been accused of some crime. All this allows a psychopath to dupe authorities and effectively act out the success of correction programs, eventually letting them back into the society where there is a high probability of them reverting back to their criminal selves and psychopaths are unable to feel remorse or guilt. Psychopathy measures are related to both the initial start of a criminal career, which tends to be more “severe and versatile” in nature and “violent recidivism” (Pederson et al., 2010) -–indicating the creative mind as well as the cruel nature of the psychopaths. A forensic psychiatric unit in Denmark was used as the sample size in the study of Pederson and his team over a period of 5.7 years. The purpose of the experiment was to measure the correlation between psychopathy and recidivism and it was concluded that psychopathy was a sound basis for predicting the occurrence of both violent crimes and the tendency towards recidivism and no “significant difference was found in terms of predictability” (Pederson et al., 2010). Psychopathy is difficult to identify and cannot be cured, for these offenders the corrective programs suggested by judiciary and law will not work and it is the one factor of recidivism which has to be dealt with throughout the life of the offender. For them the better solution would be constant supervision (or permanent detainment) along with mandatory therapy sessions which could help monitor their motivations and actions as well as providing a modicum of self control. But besides these measures nothing much can be done about people who return to a life of crime even after the negative consequences because of psychopathy. Asides from the factors discussed, interestingly, in current years there have been theories proposed relating the rate of recidivism with the rates of release on full parole or release under mandatory supervision. The rates of recidivism have been higher in the prisoners who were under the supervision, almost the double percentage of prisoners were rearrested for repeat misdemeanors from the supervised group than the full parole group in a period from 1975-1985 in a research done by the correctional services of Canada (Correctional Service of Canada, 2012). While it may simply be a case of correlation, that is, the prisoners released under supervision were those who were already at high risk and those under full parole had undergone more extensive rehabilitation, it may also indicate that when ‘you treat someone like a criminal, they tend to become one’. The lack of trust in the prisoners may have further de-motivated them and pushed them back on to the path of the crimes they were prosecuted for but thus far, there has not been any scientific research done to prove the level of causation between mandatory supervision and recidivism (which also takes into account other affecting factors). For judicial procedures understanding rates of recidivism, the triggers behind them and indentifying high risk individuals is an essential part of the process. Correctly identifying those individuals can help design punishments or programs which will be most effective and lower the burden on the prison system while keeping innocent citizens safe. Many quantitative measures and methods have been designed to measure the risk of recidivism and these take into account factors like sexual deviancy, prior felonies, childhood abuse and others discussed above with different weights attached as per the study of the scholars. These empirical actuarial approaches are helpful as they provide a scientific criterion to base judgments on, but their weakness comes from the fact that they cannot recognize extraordinary circumstances or the mental state of the criminal. It is quite possible that a high risk individual due to some situation had a change of heart and with the right kind of support is in the correct mental state to be rehabilitated. There has been research conducted to test the different methods of cataloging risk assessments to minimize chances of error and provide support for the actuarial models. There are four basic models of structuring recidivism risk, these include empirical actuarial where the offenders are judged according to the statistical models available and the risk factors associated with their lives. The clinically adjusted actuarial takes into consideration the mental conditions of the offender and any kind of disorders that may affect eventual tendency towards recidivism. The mechanical model is similar to the actuarial models but with less room for adjustments for different factors and finally the structured professional judgment which is given by the judiciary council after they have personally assessed the offender according to the recognized risk factors (Morton-Bourgon & Hanson, 2009). It is widely accepted, however, that any of these structured approaches are more accurate than unstructured professional judgments. Currently the programs designed for prisoners do not always concentrate on the minimizing the occurrence of recidivism, rather they are focused on eliminating erratic and disturbance creating behavior through environments which reflect ‘boot camps’ and concentrate on factors which don’t always correlate with crime. The biggest flaw in the existing programs is that they fail to take into account individual risk assessments. These programs can actually have a negative effect on low risk offenders by putting them in close proximity with high risk and more dangerous offenders. The difference can be as great as a 6 percent increase in recidivism rates for low-risk offenders and a 10 percent reduction for high risk (Latessa, 2010). By accurately categorizing high and low risk offenders we have a higher chance of getting effective results. The programs also have to give greater importance targeting factors which directly correlate with crime such as “Temperamental and antisocial personality patterns conducive to criminal activity”, antisocial/procriminal attitudes, Substance abuse neglect and abuse suffered as a child and others. Effective behavioral treatments will be of more help than mere therapy or counseling of the criminals; they have to be taught valuable skills as well as behavioral control so that they can be rehabilitated back into the society without any risk of repeat offenses. “Non-behavioral interventions that are often ineffectively used in programs would include drug and alcohol education, fear tactics and other emotional appeals, talk therapy, non-directive client-centered approaches, having them read books, shaming them, lectures, milieu therapy, and self-help” (Latessa, 2010). Recidivism exists because of criminals who cannot or will not learn from the negative consequences of their crimes. The factors behind their behavior are mainly rooted in a history of family problems and anti social behaviors which while giving a bleak picture of the breakdown of societal safety nets for these people also gives hope that through structured programs these repeat offenders can be successfully guided towards being productive citizens. Understanding the factors behind recidivism is an important step towards planning and implementing these programs and could help in curtailing the rates of crimes which exist today. References Director General, Correctional Service of Canada. (2012). FORUM on Corrections Research. Correction services Canada, Retrieved from: http://www.cscscc.gc.ca/text/pblct/forum/e053/e053h-eng.shtml Firestone, P., Nunes K. L., Moulden, H., Broom, I., & Bradford, J. M. (2005). Hostility and Recidivism in Sexual Offenders. Archives of sexual behavior 34(3), 277- 283. DOI: 10.1007/s10508-005-3116-8 Hanson, R. K. (2009). The psychological assessment of risk for crime and violence. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne 50, 172-182. Kingston, D. A., Firestone, P., Wexler, A., & Bradford, J. M. (2008, March). Factors associated with recidivism among intrafamilial child molesters. Journal of Sexual Aggression 14(1), 3-18. Latessa, E. J. (2010). Cutting Recidivism, what works and what doesn’t. The Slammer. Retrieved from: http://www.the-slammer.org/carousel/cutting-recidivism-what-works- what-doesn%E2%80%99t Morton-Bourgon, K. E., & Hanson, R. K. (2009). The Accuracy of Recidivism Risk Assessments For Sexual Offenders: A Meta-Analysis of 118 Prediction Studies. Psychological Assessment 21(1), 1–21. Oregon Youth Authority. (2011). OYA Recidivism Risk Assessment Modeling Risk to Recidivate. State of Oregon. Retrieved from: http://www.oregon.gov/OYA/research/RecidivismRiskAssessment_ModelingRisk.pdf?ga=t Pedersen, L. Kunz, C. Rasmussen, K., & Elsass, P. (2010). Psychopathy as a Risk Factor for Violent Recidivism: Investigating the Psychopathy Checklist Screening Version (PCL:SV) and the Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathic Personality (CAPP) in a Forensic Psychiatric Setting. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health 9(4), 308- 315. Salgado, D. M. 2007. An examination of risk and resiliency factors in predicting recidivism rates among incarcerated women. Dissertations and Master’s Theses from the University of Rhode Island. Paper AAI3280553.  Stine, A. (2010). What does Recidivism mean and why is it important? Andrew Stine, P. A Blog. Retrieved from: http://www.andrewdstine.com/78/section.aspx/194/what-does- recidivism-mean-and-why-is-it-important Read More