Research indicates that confinement and detention are more harmful to prisoners than they are helpful. The idea that offender could change their ways through being shown the right path without necessary confining them was a major drive towards the development of alternative consequences for crimes among others. On the other hand, there are various reasons as to why alternatives to incarceration were developed in the United States. One such reason is to curb the growing population in prisons as crime increased causing crowding in prisons.
Despite the attempts to expand and improve prisons, rapid growth in crime rates created the need for alternatives to imprisonment as space became a factor of concern in the prisons. Secondly, the need to expand prison space and the number of prisons translated to an increase in the jail expenditure allocation by the government. Prison spending for proliferation on included several costs such as construction costs, security costs, rehabilitative costs within the prisons and increase in expense on families for prisoners which raised the budget such that prison allocation superseded expenditure on important economic units such as education and health. Thus, the financial constraints of confinement led to the need for alternatives to imprisonment to be identified and implemented to lessen the need for more prisons by reducing numbers of prisoners in custody (Sevdiren, 2011). Evidently, changing perceptions of crime, the physical and infrastructural challenges facing the prisons and the economic costs required to meet the rising numbers of offenders were the primary drivers for the search of alternatives to incarceration.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Alternative incarceration is mostly used on juvenile offenders especially those that have committed crimes for the first time. The primary objective of Juvenile alternatives consequence to imprisonment is to prevent stigma which would envelop from being confined in prisons. These alternatives to detention have mostly involved the limitation of freedom or close monitoring of the offender. They provide the youths with an opportunity to continue their usual schedules such as school and social lives while at the same time suffering the consequences of their actions of crime. These alternatives to incarceration for youth include probation, community service, and guidance and counseling.
Probation is potentially the most used alternative for juvenile offenders and forms the foundation of the court of minors system. Probation involves monitoring the juvenile’s activities and limiting his freedom regarding movements and activities. The tribunal defines a probation term, and the rules are outlined guiding on what is and what is not expected of the offender. He or she is then allocated a probation officer who monitors the youth and the offender reports back to her to ensure probation rule are adhered to. In the event that a minor violates the probation terms, the probation is revoked, and a more callous punishment is instituted (Michon, 2017).
On the other hand, judges may order Juveniles to work in the local community for a certain amount of hours per day as punishment for the crimes committed. They work by providing allocated community service such as cleaning the environments of the community, helping out in community health facilities or homes for the elderly among others. Community service hours are defined by the court and failure to attend the community service as required and for hours allocated leads to harsher punishment (Michon, 2017). Finally, guidance and counseling may be recommended as punishment for a crime committed. The counseling is however strict, and the court requires the counselor report for clearance. Counseling aims at making the minor a better person by finding the reasons for crime and attempting to understand their perspective. Eventually, counseling helps the minor towards reform and avoiding recidivism.
The use of non-incarceration methods in correcting a minor ensures that the minor is not taken always from family, friends and the community as a whole. This, in turn, has various societal and individual benefits one such benefit is that it provides active involvement of all the people surrounding the minor such has friends and family. This helps the minor feel cared for and motivated them to change for the sake of their loved ones. The offender is placed in a position where he is held accountable to the community and victims of the crime as well as the guardians. The minor is also able to compensate the victims for the harm caused and also experiences the consequences of his actions to help him take responsibilities for his measures to prevent future crime. The methods also help curb the cost of juvenile programs which in turn means funds can be redirected to community development. Counseling, for instance, helps the minors as individuals express themselves and fight the underlying causes that drive them to commit a crime (Hines, 2008).
In conclusion, the alternatives of incarcerations are especially effective for minors who commit crimes. It provides them with an avenue to pay for their actions without missing out on their normal lives and at the same time helping manage the crisis of prison population and save on program costs. The non-confining methods are efficient because they do not lead to stigma the by placing him in prison with others who have committed other crimes where he may acquire more criminal skills. Ultimately, they help the minor understand that the essence is to correct the behavior and compensate the victims as opposed to an attempt to ruin their lives.
References
Sevdiren, O. (2011). Some reflections on the history and development of alternatives to prison. In Alternatives to imprisonment in England and Wales, Germany and Turkey: A comparative study. (Alternatives to Imprisonment in England and Wales, Germany and Turkey) (pp. 13-43). Berlin: Springer Berlin.
Michon, K. (2017). Juvenile court sentencing options. Nolo Legal Encyclopedia . Retrieved on 2 June 2017 from http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/juvenile-court-sentencing-options-32225.html.
Hines, J. D. (2008). Restoring Juvenile Justice. GPSOLO magazine . Retrieved on 2 June 2017 from https://www.americanbar.org/content/newsletter/publications/gp_solo_magazine_home/gp_solo_magazine_index/restoringjuvenilejustice.html.
