Analysis of Cullen and Gilberts View: Rehabilitation as the Major Goal of Correctional Systems - Term Paper Example

Critical Analysis of Cullen and Gilbert’s View: Rehabilitation as the Major Goal of Correctional Systems In the field of criminology, there are different theoretical approaches that are being studied and applied. These methods can be utilized on the basis of the aspect of purpose and function. In the aspect of rehabilitation, the main focus of the theories that are established is the feasibility of use in the correctional system. One of the theoretical approaches in the correctional system is the view by Cullen and Gilbert. The main objective of the study undertaken is to be able to present and analyse the crucial concept and assumptions in relation to the theoretical approach. In addition, the strengths and weaknesses are also imparted to be able to portray the potential gain of the whole system and even the limitations. Historical Perspective on the Role of Rehabilitation in the Correctional System The main view of Cullen and Gilbert can be considered as positive theories to answer the problems of criminology. Rehabilitation is the main objective that can be projected in relation to the effect of application in the behaviour of the detainees. The positive view of the theory can be considered as a priority in contrary to that of the old theories of justice that involve deterrence and retribution. Through the course of modern justice system, it can be considered that the role of rehabilitation on the reform of the offenders had taken the main road and had produced influence. The said influence had developed on the turn of the 1900s wherein the development and changing of the characteristics and the attitudes of the criminals and offenders had been projected as the main solution for the decrease of the number of crimes (Cullen and Gendreau, 2000). Through the 70’s toward the end of the century, the effectiveness and the feasibility of the rehabilitation approach in the correctional systems had been criticized and questioned. Basically as the rehabilitation theory affirms that the crimes had been committed by the offenders on the basis of the problems in behaviour and inadequate decision making, critics believe that the process cannot help the society lessen criminals but there are dangers that rehabilitation cannot fully discipline the offenders. This can then pose danger to the welfare of the people (Wilson, 2005). In the presentation of the view of Cullen and Gilbert on the proper approach for correctional system, it is important to be able to present the different pros and cons. For that matter the criticisms of the rehabilitation theory is needed to be studied and scrutinized. The View of Cullen and Gilbert The main scenario in the study undertaken by Cullen and Gilbert relates to the world in the presence of different types and forms of crimes that are done by offenders. In the said perspective, the offenders are not viewed as culprit and at fault but actions are treated as a form of sickness that is needed to be treated. In addition, the criminal himself lacks the capability to controls his actions. There are moments wherein people have impaired sense of sensitivity to commit mistakes and wrong deeds. Based on the said assumptions, the offenders and criminals are needed to be understood (Cullen and Gendreau, 2000). Rehabilitation and other forms of positive development programs are the main actions applied to be able to counteract crimes. Basically, every crime that are committed cannot be controlled by the individual himself. Although the offenders are imprisoned and convicted, it can be considered that the target programs are aimed to improve the behaviour of the criminal (Roberts and Hough, 2002). The application of the view by the Cullen and Gilbert on rehabilitation can be evaluated as having the goal of always changing the offenders and criminals toward a positive behaviour away from crimes. It presents the magnitude of the capacity of the people to change for the better. Through rehabilitation, the said criminals can be trained to follow the provisions of law while learning to have a positive life and happiness through the process of rehabilitation (Cullen and Gendreau, 2000). Basically the said theory and approach had been developed and established on the quest to determine ways and means to develop positive results from the negative events such as the crimes that had been committed and the imprisonment process. Correctional objectives that are centred on the development of the behaviour of the person can be considered as optimal on the basis of the rehabilitation theory based on the fact that improvement as well as straightening of ways and attitudes of the offenders and criminals can be targeted and achieved. The objective can be described as the transformation of the offenders to law abiding members of the population and citizen (Cullen and Gendreau, 2000). The process of rehabilitation is composed of the application of a predetermined course of action to reform the criminals. It is often a perceived training of the offenders to be able to prepare them to their new life when presented to the society again. The establishment of the techniques that are applied are often composed of programs that can shape up and sharpen the capabilities of the offenders to cope and use proper decision making process that are based on the provisions of the law. The process targets different aspects of the person. One of the methods related to rehabilitation is through counselling. The process is towards the objective of knowing the offenders and providing the important ways to understand themselves and other people. The said method targets the behavioural aspect. Even livelihood and other ways of coping to the outside world are undertaken. Other programs tackle the cognitive aspects of the criminals. The main target though is the combination and simultaneous application of the cognitive-behavioural skills to be able to increase responsibility, awareness and control of the criminal over his attitude, thus creating stability of character (McLaughlin & Hughes, 2003). The presented concepts are general views in relation to the rehabilitation theory. The objective can be considered simple and on the positive aspect, the acceptance and the understanding of the public and the offenders themselves, define the feasibility of application. To be able to fully gain an understanding of the concept, it is important to determine the challenges and criticisms related to the view. Challenges and Criticisms Being Faced by the View Although the main target and objective of the view on rehabilitation is towards the positive development of the characters and attitudes of the criminals, the process cannot be considered as a simple one. Due to the said reason, criticisms and contradictions regarding the effectiveness of the said method as the core objective in the correctional system is abound. In fact, the said view is being continuously challenged on the basis of different points. One of the criticisms of the view on the importance of rehabilitation in the correctional system is related to the decrease in the impact of the punishment being given. It is considered a fact that criminals that are incapable and even determined of intellectual problems are given consideration and provisions by the law to have another form of punishment. In relation, the consideration, that committing a crime is analogous to having a particular disease, can be difficult for people to perceive. It is even considered as actions that can lighten the punishment. Then, with regards to disciplining the criminals, pampering and giving consideration on their mistake can be considered by some as a failed objective (Cullen and Gendreau, 2000; Roberts & Hough, 2002). In addition to the presented notion, the application of rehabilitation as the core theory in the correctional system can be considered and viewed by different groups to fail in significantly decreasing the occurrence of crime. This can be considered as the main reason for the decrease in the trust of the people on the said concept. As it was formerly viewed as ideal to be able to develop offenders and criminals to become law abiding individuals, the continuous prevalence of different forms of crimes had been considered by different groups as the indication of the failure of the said method to minimize recurrence of crimes (Cullen and Gendreau, 2000). An example that can be sited regarding the limitation of the utilization of the rehabilitation theory is the cases that are considered as hate crimes such as killing and man slaughter. If such cases are viewed to be a wrong decision made by the criminal or even beyond control, such view as considered by the critics are buffered by the presented theory (McLaughlin & Hughes, 2003). These views are considered as the main reasons for the diminishing trust of the people on the effectiveness of changing the criminals through the process of rehabilitation. The said events on criticism continuously increased towards the end of the century. This can be considered as the main reason for the more serious actions and methods such as “penal harm” being applied to be able to achieve the main objective of the criminal justice system which is the elimination of the rate of occurrence of different forms of crimes in the society. Punitive theories toward the offenders are the main system targeted by a number of nations (Cullen and Gendreau, 2000). In addition, the view that the criminals has committed crimes on the basis of wrong choice and decision as well as misconception, the programmes for the development of such skills are even included in the methods for rehabilitation. But upon the determination of the effectiveness of the program that was even applied by a number of nations across the globe, it had resulted to an even that such application and activity failed to achieve substantial change in the offences and crimes (McLaughlin & Hughes, 2003). One of the most significant criticisms received by the theory of rehabilitation in correctional facilities was given by Robert Martinson discussing that rehabilitation is one of the methods that failed in changing the state of criminology in the nation. In addition, it was even implied that due to the hope of the system to consider the positive theories, it had caused detrimental effects to the justice system (Wilson, 2005) Analysis Basically, the view of Cullen and Gilbert to rehabilitate the criminals and offenders to become law abiders can be considered as a positive theory recognizing the positive nature of the human person. There are different ways and aspects that can be viewed to be able to analyse the issue. On the point of view of the criminal justice system, the main objective is the decrease in the occurrence and recurrence of crime. In relation to the said aspect, studies had shown that there is an insignificant change in the number crimes committed upon application of the different programs of rehabilitation. Although the determination of the crime rate cannot result to a sweeping generalization on the benefits of the theory of rehabilitation, it comprises an essential part in the determination of the feasibility of the method. If the development of the criminals and offenders are considered, rehabilitation can target the total personality, thus, even though there are criticisms regarding the insignificant effect of the method, intrapersonal changes even at a very minute degree is possible. This can be attributed to the fact that to some degree, the crimes committed are based on mistakes, wrong decisions and irrationality at a random instance. On the basis of these presented notions, it is important to consider that the integration and synergy of the different theories that can be applied in the correctional system can be the most effective. The theory of punishment can be balanced out by the considerate view of the theory on rehabilitation. Conclusion The theory of rehabilitation as presented by Cullen and Gilbert, based on the different concepts and ideas is a considerate method. The criticism that it cannot fully manage the correctional system can be accurate to some degree. But it is important to consider that the concept of justice emanates balance. Thus, to be able to achieve the most effective method, the combination of the concepts is important. This can be attributed to the fact that punitive approach in the correctional system can be brutal in the absence of the consideration that a human person can change and be rehabilitated. The need for the view of Cullen and Gilbert to balance the strict view of the punitive theory can be considered optimum in the correctional process. The said view is analogous to the heart being able to balance the decisions made by the mind. Reference: Cullen, F. T. and Gendreau, P. (2000) Assessing Correctional Rehabilitation: Policy, Practice, and Prospects. Criminal Justice, 3, p. 109 – 175. Carter, R. M. and Glaser, D. (Eds.) (1977) Correctional Institutions. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott. McLaughlin, E. and Muncie, J. (2001) Controlling Crime. SAGE. McLaughlin, E., Muncie, J. and Hughes, G. (2003) Criminological Perspectives: Essential Readings. SAGE. Roberts, J. V. and Hough, M. (Eds) (2002) Changing Attitudes to Punishment. Willan Publishing. Wilson, R. J. (2005) Are Cognitive Problem-solving Skills Programmes Really Not Working? A Response to ‘Evaluating Evidence for the Effectiveness of the Reasoning and Rehabilitation Programme’ The Howard Journal, 44 (3), p. 319-321. Read More