The Effectiveness of Punishment in Improving Desistance - Coursework Example

The Effectiveness of Punishment in Improving Desistance Table of Contents 2. Introduction 3. What is Desistance? 4. What are Communityand Custodial punishments? 5. Crime rate in the UK 6. Literature Review 7. Role of Community and Custodial Punishments in Inducing Desistance 8. Limited Effect of Probation Services 9. Reforms Needed 10. Conclusion Abstract All over the world rehabilitation of prisoners and ex-offenders is an issue of great concern. Research about improving desistance in criminals analyzes various practices and policies related to crime. Encouraging long term abstinence from crime for at least a period of two years in offenders with the help of criminal justice policies, social networks and the help of the criminal’s family members is suggested as the ultimate solution in improving desistance. Providing complete rehab in social, moral and the psychological level with the help of the judicial system helps in decreasing crime and improving the lifestyle of offenders making them refrain from engaging in similar activities further. This essay analyzes the two important theories of the ‘age crime curve’ and ‘social deprivation mindset’. It analyzes the empirical proof supporting the theories by various authors and presents the conclusions and recommendations based on the readings. Introduction Karl Marx (1956) insisted crime and the criminals are essential for a society because they build the criminal justice law and keep the bourgeois society active in protecting their work. According to them, criminals are the equilibrium force of the society. Research has been rampant on improving the lives of these criminals and making them lead a fruitful and normal life. Such research is vital at humanitarian level as every crime is influenced by certain aspect of the society. Also, it is the victims and taxpayers who bear the cost of the offender’s crime and nurturing them in the prison. Helping the criminals lead a normal life is a measure of indirectly sculpting the society to a more secure place. The State tries to do the same through threats, punishments and probation. This essay explores in detail about the effectiveness of such punishments and enhancements of prison sentences in increasing desistance among criminals. What is Desistance? Even after much research it is still an enigma whether a person succumbs to desistance because of the fear of punishment or by their free will to transform into respectable citizens of the society. The influence of family members and the natural supporters in the community serve as a great boost for the offenders to mend their ways. Desistance is the ability to transform oneself from the status of criminal into a legitimate citizen. The mentality to resist authority changes with time and the person reaches a state of desistance because of punishments, change of mentality and various other reasons. The process involves four major steps. What are Community and Custodial Punishments? Custodial punishment refers to imprisonment of the convicted person. A person is sent to prison when the court feels the general public needs to be protected from the offender’s dangerous attitude. Section 152(2) of Criminal Justice Act 2003 states custodial sentences are granted when the crime is "so serious that neither a fine alone nor a community sentence can be justified for the offence.” Determinate sentences, life sentences and extended sentences are the most common type of custodial punishments though there are other categories. Community sentence refers to being convicted but serving the sentence outside the prison, doing service oriented work. Minor crimes like damaging the property, assaulting a vulnerable person or other benefit frauds are punished likewise. Community sentence is granted if the person is convicted for the first time due to carelessness or minor faults and if the authorities feel situational circumstances or mental issues prevailed while committing the crime. The convicted person is required to do services like cleaning or decorating public places for nearly 40 to 300 hours based on the nature of the crime. As a part of restorative justice, they are made to meet the victims affected by convicted persons offence. Juvenile offenders are granted three types of community sentences namely, referral orders, reparation orders and Youth Rehabilitation order. Crime Rate in the UK Both custodial punishments and community sentence have limited effect in inducing desistance among the offenders. Nearly half of the adult offenders coming out of the prison after custodial punishment return to the prison for reoffending within a year. The overall prison population in the UK has doubled since 1993. Adult reconviction rate have fluctuated between 38.6% and 45.4% from the period starting 2000 to 2008. Nearly three quarters of adult offenders who left custodial punishment returned to prison within nine years (Ministry of Justice, 2010). Nearly 74% of the juveniles released from custodial sentences or the community sentences reoffended within a year. These statistics indicate both community sentences as well as custodial punishments do little to inhibit resistance. The changes which occur over time as the offender matures are the only means inculcating desistance. (Ministry of Justice, 2010) (Ministry of Justice, 2010) (Ministry of Justice, 2010) Comparing themselves with the other legitimate citizens of similar age induces a change of mind as the person grows which is the important reason for desistance. Several authors have written about this ‘age crime curve’ and its connection with the desistance. Literature Review The age crime curve related teenage as the peak period of offending the law (Kazemian, 2007). The theory indicates every person matures with age and the rush to oppose every given instructions start to decrease as more important matters occupy their mind. The transformation from the status of young offender to new father is a process worth observing says Kazemian. The indomitable spirit which could not be changed by severe punishments and constant restrictions could not change during the teenage will automatically fall into place during the middle age. Studying the pattern and life of people who effectively transform their life through desistance will help us gain major insights into the mindsets of situational criminals. The knowledge gained from their life will help in refining the criminal justice process (McNeill, 2006). Empirical proof for understanding the ‘social deprivation mindset’ is present with various social workers involved with the probation and prison control. People associated with juvenile criminals usually experience such needs to renovate. This process is known as ‘maturational reform’, a biological happening in the body associated with puberty and excessive anger (Goring, 1919). Other notable authors who did significant work on the prisons in various parts of the world, especially the United Kingdom are Moffitts, Ezell and Cohen and Sampson and Laub. Moffitts (1993) stated the first empirical work combing taxonomy and psychology. She classified two groups of offenders. The first category of people commits violent acts only during the adolescence. They are known as adolescence-limited offenders. The second categories of criminals are known as life-course persistent offenders. Sampson and Laub (1993) mentioned the drive to maintain social prestige and achieve material progress as the reason behind major financial crimes and white collar crimes. Role of Community and Custodial Punishments in Inducing Desistance Three main reasons are stated for desistance occurrence after elaborate analysis conducted on various prisons throughout the world. They are, getting tired of the demanding prison life, reassessment of values and morals which occurs as age and maturity increases. The inclination towards the wants in life changes as a person ages kindling desistance rather than resistance in them. The possibility of extending the prison term due to non-co-operation also threatens several young prisoners who long to go out and explore life (Cusson & Pinsonneault, 1986). The role of community sentences in curbing resistance is quite limited. Making the offenders wear bright orange suit and keeping track of them constantly with an electrical tag often irritates the juvenile offenders beyond explanation. They are reminded of their offense continuously every moment of the sentence creating unlimited mental pressure which bursts out through other crimes. Nevertheless, community sentences are not totally unworthy. Making the offenders stay in a secluded area among similar offenders like a rehab and participate in restorative justice will help rather than scrutinizing them among the society constantly. Custodial punishments, particularly extension of sentences instill in the prisoners a fear about the consequences of their crime. This is effective to a certain level in inducing desistance. But, the societal branding that they are ex-prisoners drives them back to the former life quite soon. Strict laws to prevent such ex-offender discrimination and measures to provide proper employment to people coming out of the prison will help a lot in instilling desistance further. Limited Effects of Probation Services The major step taken by criminal justice in improving the life of the criminals are the probation facilities. Farral and Calverleys (2006) studies conducted elaborate studies about the probation measures undertaken in England. After interviewing 200 men and women and maintaining a standard follow up of their life in probation and after that, the study concluded, basically, nothing works in probation except having a person to talk to. The millions of dollars spend in the program have actually given little results. Those who cultivated active desistance did only with the support of their family, help from the community and friends and the personal determination to change. Individual motivation and favorable situations play a major role in the helping a person renovate their life. Reforms Needed The major reform called for criminal justice is the ability to work with the criminals rather than working on them. Most of the criminals have several productive qualities including ardent self-determination. The probation intervention should help them focus on their strengths and help them identify the opportunities to use them rather than refrain from their main qualities involving strength and vigor. They should be guided on using their potential strengths for positive development. For example, a Scottish prison engaged the prisoners in determining what would be their best payback. The State negotiated with them in turn listing the qualities they wanted the prisoners to avoid or leave behind completely. The issues concerned with desistance should be approached with utmost diversity. A solution which works for one person will not work for another. Persistent offenders who commit crimes out of greed should be tackled in a much different way from the adolescent criminals. The probation officers or the social workers dealing with desistance should be given enough responsibility and power to handle relapses and setbacks in a constructive way. For example, a teenager helped by the probation officer to work in an office might be made to face persistent complaints about the worker. The officer should have enough power to change the employment venue or position for the prisoner until he feels comfortable working in a proper place. Forcing him to work in a situation he doesnt like will only lead to violent activities further. The major reforms should include Being realistic about the issues and taking individualistic approach to solve their problems should is a must. The state should enforce strict laws to make the community and society play their part in helping the offenders’ lead a peaceful life. Recognizing the progress and the making them examples for others Giving the ex-offenders enough hope during their testing period. Helping the people recognize their personal strengths and developing a professional skill related to it. Working along with the family members of the offenders and making them earn their love and trust back. The work of Owers (2011) in the Irish prison has proved, prisons cans serve as effective places for inculcating desistance. Building meaningful relationship between the prisoners and the staff will help them in handling the discipline systems with mercy. Research has so far proved the enhancement of the prison term rather than incorporation of punishments helps in improving desistance. Similarly favorable situations after release from the prison along with helpful supervision also help a lot. Correction of individual also depends largely on their personal motivation rather than punishments. Meditating on the effects of the crime and understanding the problems it creates to the society will help any person refrain from doing mishaps in the future. The prison officials and the society has a major role in making the prisoners understanding this rather than punishing them constantly. Conclusion Incorporating desistance is no easy task. It involves changing the nature of a person as well as the society’s perception about him. The task is quite hard. But, with the cooperation of the concerned person and the experts in the field anything is possible. Pulling out the prisoners from their past life and rehabilitation them in a productive way is the best way to create a crime free society. It not only helps them but helps in preventing reforming an entire generation that will grow up watching them as wrong examples. While punishments in the prison do not help in garnering desistance much, it definitely creates a hatred for prison life. Preventing them from going back to the prison again by returning back to their old life definitely lies in the hands of the society as well as every individual citizen rather than the ex-offenders alone. Productive reforming measures suggested above after ample research helps in attaining this goal much easily. References 1. Ezell M and Cohen L (2005). Desisting from crime, Oxford University Press 2. Farrall S and Calverley A (2006). Understanding desistance from crime, Crime and Justice Series. 3. Goring C (1919). The English convict. 4. McNeill F (2006). A desistance paradigm for offender management, Criminology and Criminal Justice. 5. Kazemian L (2007). Desistance from crime: Theoretical, empirical, methodological and policy considerations, Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice. 6. Sampson RJ and Laub JH (1993). Crime in the making: pathways and turning points through life. London 7. Owers Review (2011). Review of the Northern Ireland prison service, Prisons Review Team, Belfast  8. McNeill, Farall S., Lightowler C & Maruna S. (2012). Why people stop offending: Discovering desistance. IRISS Insights. 9. Marx K (1956). The Social System of Capitalism. Sociology and Social Philosophy. Penguin Press. 10. Ministry of Justice (2010). Green Paper Evidence Report Breaking the Cycle: Effective Punishment, Rehabilitation and Sentencing of Offenders. Retrieved 16 th April, 2014 from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/185947/green-paper-evidence-a.pdf Read More