Rehabilitation as a Form of Criminal Punishment

Introduction 

Disciplinary institutions have the responsibility to ensure that there is a continuous justice and order in the nation. The judiciary has the mandate to decide if a suspect of a particular criminal offence is guilty, and if so what kind of punishment they deserve based on the requirements of the law (Rubin, 2001). For instance, the United States has a well-established system of policy responses aimed at not only punishing, but also deterring offenders from committing crimes. It is worth to note that punishments should be applied specifically as a form of corrective measure to law offenders and not to threaten one’s life or torture the law offenders (Rubin, 2001). A good punitive measure is the one that is predictable (Day, 2015). Such a punishment therefore, imputes fear to the perpetrators of the crime from committing their intended act of crime. 

For a punishment to work well, it has to be applied with ultimate intensity, while ensuring that it does not go beyond the general sense of justice and fairness (Day, 2015). This is because law offenders also have their rights as human beings and they should be treated with integrity. There is therefore, the need for the government to establish a system within the disciplinary institutions to conduct research in order to establish the best punishments that may work well towards preventing criminals from committing the offences or further breaking of the law (Ward, 2010). Psychologists play an important role in studying punishments, with both human beings and animals, under well-controlled laboratory conditions (Ward, 2010). According to Ward (2010), psychologists have established that the ability of a punishment to deter anyone from committing a crime is determined by one’s realization of the dire consequences looming if one is caught committing the crime. There are various types of punishments which include death penalty, banishment, imprisonment, fines, and rehabilitation (“Types of Criminal Punishment”, 2016). Of these, rehabilitation has proved to be the most effective type of criminal punishment in terms of deterring a criminal offender from committing further offence (Grant & Rice, 2006). This paper therefore, argues convincingly that rehabilitation is the best type of punishment that should be embraced by all disciplinary institutions. 

The Current Problem 

Statistics show that the United States prisons are currently housing about two million prisoners who are either serving short-term or long-terms jail sentences (Benson, 2003). This translates to one person in jail for every 142 United States residents. The United States therefore, is one of the developed nations with the highest number of citizens involved in criminal justice systems in the world. Further investigations by Benson (2003) indicate that the United States prisons started receiving the high number of prisoners after 1970s when rehabilitation, as an alternative form of punishment in the United States prisons, took a back seat (Benson, 2003). Since then, most United States disciplinary institutions have been deploying incarceration of the highest order as their preferred means of topping up discipline to the law breakers. This paper uses the term incarceration to refer to a mode of punishment in which the prisons use a combination of strict sentencing guidelines, budget shortfalls and a punitive philosophy of corrections (Benson, 2003). The use of incarceration within the United States disciplinary institutions has done less to curb criminal occurrences within the state. Instead, incarceration has made today’s prisons not only much more unpleasant, but also much less concerned with instilling rehabilitative measures to the inhabitants as compared to the past (Benson, 2003). Consequently, the negligence of rehabilitation as the best punitive method is to be blamed for the high number of people in United States who are involved in criminal justice. 

There are various reasons why incarceration may not be the best method to mitigate the problem of criminal injustices. To begin with, most people who are involved in criminal offences are mentally ill ( Demleitner, 2014 ). Often, mentally incapacitated individuals commit criminal acts out of their consciousness (Grant, 2006). Laving severe punitive measures to mentally ill people therefore, does more of torture to such individuals than correcting them. After all, mentally ill people commit serious crimes, such as murder or rape cases unknowingly, and if released after they complete their jail term, they further commit similar of even worse criminal offences since they fear nothing at the moment of criminal acts (Robert, 1995). This implies that the best punishment for mentally ill criminal offenders is rehabilitation (Robert, 1995). By rehabilitation, this paper refers to the psychological approaches targeting cognitive distortions linked with certain criminal acts committed by specific offenders. 

Another reason why incarceration may not be the best punitive method to law breakers is that most criminal offenders are drug addicts ( Demleitner, 2014 ). It is well known that drugs alter people’s way of thinking and reasoning (Tim, 2015). A person on drug may therefore, commit crime out of unconsciousness or may be triggered to commit crime in order to take the advantage of the crime to earn themselves the drugs in question (Tim, 2015). For instance, most road accidents are caused by drugs and substance abuse ( Demleitner, 2014 ). Jailing a driver may therefore, not help in curbing road accidents; instead, drivers who are found driving while drug should be taken to rehabilitation centers in order to help them get out drug addiction (Tim, 2015). Again, a drug addict may steal or opt for robbery cases in order to get money to purchase another dose (Tim, 2015). Such individuals should therefore, be helped by psychologists to stop the habit of drugs and substance abuse, and instead be trained to find other means of earning their living, such as opening their own businesses and acting movies and other plays. 

The final reason why incarceration may not work best in topping up the discipline of the criminal offenders is that most criminals are good at finding ways of escaping punishments (Albert, 2003). The threat of the severe punishments have thus failed to deter criminals from committing criminal acts, as long as the perpetrators of the crime have a means of escaping the punishments ( Demleitner, 2014 ). For example, people indulge in criminal acts and once they are caught, they use money to bribe the police or any other individuals involved in instilling discipline (Zuckerman, 1991). Corrupt individuals are therefore, corruption addicts and they use all means to escape punishments, hence feel less frightened by the threat of punishment after they commit a particular crime (Zuckerman, 1991). Corrupt individuals should therefore, be taken to rehabilitation centers to help them recover from the disease. 

Solution 

Study has listed three main characteristics of people who are involved in criminal justice. Most individuals who are either serving jail terms or in the process of prosecution are likely to be either mentally ill, drug and substance addicts, and or have relational issues ( Schaefer & Stefancic, 2003 ). These are the people who are in serious need of counseling and rehabilitation. They need a special group of people called psychologists and psychiatrists who are equipped with skills in rehabilitation process ( Schaefer & Stefancic, 2003 ). Although all law breakers leave their victims in despair, frightened, traumatized, and yearning for justice, punishing the perpetrators of criminal acts by incarceration only may not serve the prime purpose of punishment (Robert, 1995). The main goal punishment is to correct the criminal offenders and deter further repletion of the same offense. While incarceration may be viewed by many people as a way of making the victims of a particular crime feel fulfilled in terms of receiving their due justice, it may not work well in terms of keeping them safe from further assortment. 

Most judicial punishments involve imprisonments for a specified period of time. It is therefore, very unfortunate that once a certain criminal offender finishes serving their jail sentences, they are released and allow to interact with the society (Robert, 1995). At the same time, these people are fellow citizens and they have the right to mingle freely with other citizens on completion of their jail term. Considering that most criminal offenders are the victims of mental illness, drug and substance abuse, and poor relationships, these individuals pose a great danger to the society if released without having gone through rigorous rehabilitation ( Robert, 1995 ). Therefore, rehabilitation should be made the key part of the United States prison policy if the nation has to effectively mitigate the problem of overcrowding in prisons. 

The current United States principle of “get tough on crime” is outdated and not serving the right purpose of punishment ( Schaefer & Stefancic, 2003 ). Instead, the government should establish a well set of system for rehabilitation in jails, rather than just a mere incarceration. Rehabilitation in prisons may be approached in various ways. First, prisoner should develop occupational skills to equip law offenders who commit crimes, such as theft and robbery due to poverty, with knowledge to be able to earn their living in just means after serving their jail terms (Mccain & Gary, 2015). Individuals who are at the school age should be taken to approved schools and serve their jail terms while schooling (Mccain & Gary, 2015). This helps them to be responsible people as they prepare to join the rest of the society after sentence term. Besides, prisons should make arrangements and avail spiritual leaders to the prison in order to help in equipping prisoners with spiritual knowledge necessary to make them responsible citizens in the society after their jail term. 

The second way in which rehabilitation may be approached in prisons is from mental illness point of view (Albert, 2003). According to the United States department of justice estimates, about twenty percent of people in prisons have mental disorders ( Schaefer & Stefancic, 2003 ). There is therefore, the need for prisons to employ both psychologists and psychiatrists to assist in screening new inmates for mental illness ( Schaefer & Stefancic, 2003 ). Screening helps in coming up with a list of individuals who have certain degree of mental disorders, thereby forming group therapy and crisis counseling. This helps in helping mentally ill prisoners recover from their problems and stop them from committing crimes out of unconsciousness. Rehabilitation of mentally ill prisoners is vital as it prepares such prisoners to be friendly to the society after they finish serving their jail terms and hence preventing future occurrences of criminal acts associated with mental illness. 

Measures should also be put in place to help in rehabilitating prisoners who are victims of drugs and substance abuse (Robert, 2003). Research has shown that a good number of people serving criminal justice are addicts of drug and substance abuse ( Schaefer & Stefancic, 2003 ). Disciplinary institutions should therefore, make use of psychologists who are trained to develop distinguished programs for drugs and substance abuse aimed at preparing prisoners for transition back to the society (Benson, 2003). Prisoners who are drug addicts should be helped to recover successfully from their additive state and be educated on the dangers of drug abuse in order to prevent further usage of drugs. This helps the prisons to release reformed people to the society who are ready to mingle with the community without posing any danger to the society. 

The final class of prisoners who need rehabilitation rather than incarceration type of punishment is that made of individuals who commit crimes owing to ruined relationships, such as family quarrels and broken relationships (Albert, 2003). Some people are unable to control their emotions when they engage in quarrels and thus end up committing a crime that later make them regret in life. Laving heavy penalties to hot-tempered individuals may not be a good solution to correct them. Such people need a series of motivational speakers to be guided on how to build strong relationships and how to avoid a state of despair in them in order to avoid repetition of such crimes (Albert, 2003). This helps greatly to not only creating a secure society, but also works towards reducing population pressure in the prisons, as it eliminates the occurrences of further crimes accruing from poor relationships. 

Critics to the Solution 

Some people are however opposed to rehabilitation as the best form of punishment. Critics argue that retribution is the best treatment to law offenders, as it helps to show disapproval for the offender’s wrongdoing (Albert, 2003). The Vocabulary.com Dictionary defines the term retribution as the act of taking revenge or harming someone in relation for something harmful that they have done (Vocabulary.com Dictionary, 2019). Some writers argue that some criminal acts, such as murder, robbery, and rape cases, are so offensive that retribution is the only way to make the victims receive their due justice (Albert, 2003). In this regard, severe punishment for the wrongdoers makes the society acknowledge that the disciplinary system is performing its duties as expected. Such critics, further point out that retribution are the only way to achieving justice. Some individuals also argue that crime is not a matter of pathology, neither is it a product of circumstances or coincidence (Albert, 2003). They feel that some people commit crimes out of their own choice and therefore, disciplinary institution must use retribution to help in topping up the discipline of such individuals. According to them, offenders must take responsibilities for what they have done. 

Despite these critics, it would be wrong to assume that rehabilitation is not the best type of punishment for most criminal offenders. While most of us perceive the main role of prisons as the act of separation the offenders and punish them, we fail to appreciate the fact that these wrongdoers are still released to the society after serving their punitive era. These law breakers are part of the society and finally join us in the society after retribution. If these law breakers are released to the community without rehabilitating them, we definitely end up forming unsafe society. Such individuals are likely to even commit more serious crimes, as they are already experienced in the act. The prime role of the government is to protect its citizens; both law-abiding citizens and the law breakers. The government should therefore, lay down strategies to ensure that there are enough rehabilitation facilities in order to curb the monster of the rising criminal acts in the nation. 

Literature Review 

Research has shown that many authors support rehabilitation as the most effective type of punishment. A report released online by Point Park University (2016) acknowledges that rehabilitation is the best prison policy in curbing criminal acts, as it proved useful in the United States prisons back in 1970s (Criminal Justice, 2016). The report indicates that as opposed to retribution, rehabilitation helps in reducing offender recidivism and makes them useful people in the society after the punishment. Andrew Day (2015) argues that rehabilitation offers offenders a greater chance of success in crime deterrence, thus enhancing safety in the community. 

Another article published and approved by Upcounsel and titled “Punishment as Rehabilitation and Reform: Criminal Law Basics” acknowledges rehabilitation as the noblest type of punishment that contributes greatly in elimination criminal acts in any nation. Alschuler Albert (2003) advocates for rehabilitation in prisons, as it is the best mechanism of converting law breakers into useful citizens of the nation. From the above literature review, it can be concluded that most of the authors and researchers admit that rehabilitation is not only a type of punishment, but also the best corrective measure for criminal offenders. Rehabilitation champions the conversion of law breakers into useful members of the society and enhances a sense of security within the community. 

Relevant Research 

Further research should be conducted to establish if incarceration has adverse effects which trigger criminals to commit further crimes after serving their jail term. It has been observed that criminal acts accelerated in 1970s after the United States adopted the incarceration in prisons ( Schaefer & Stefancic, 2003 ). At the moment, psychologists lacked enough knowledge on the effects of retribution and the importance of rehabilitation in mitigating criminal acts within the nation. Therefore, when the principle of “get tough on crime” was introduced in 1970s, criminal cases rose to overwhelming levels, as opposed to earlier records when rehabilitation was the main type of punishment in the United States prisons ( Schaefer & Stefancic, 2003 ) . There is therefore, the likelihood that incarceration contributes greatly to criminal acts within the nation. 

It is also proposed that research should be conducted to establish if the United States prison environment is favorable to the prisoners. Chances are that the prison workers encourage criminals to commit crimes in order to fill the prisons so that the workers are assured of continuous jobs within the prisons. The period in which the prisoners spend in prisons also need be reexamined. A person who stays in prison for many years could get used to the prison life and when released, he or she finds it difficult to adjust to the society (Walters, 2006). Such people could be triggered to commit another serious criminal act in order to go back to prison, where they are used to live. 

Implications of My Research 

My research is a confirmation of what other researchers have already come up with regarding the perception of rehabilitation as a form of punishment. Like most of the authors, this paper recommends that rehabilitation should be reinstated in the United States prisons in order to reduce the number of citizens involved in criminal justice. Rehabilitation is also essential in converting law breakers into useful members of the society. Besides, rehabilitation helps in fostering a sense of security within the nation, as citizens are made to accept back people coming out of prisons as reformed citizens and help them adjust successfully to the community and the world at large. 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, United States is the leading developed nation recording the highest number of citizens involved in criminal justice cases. Research has indicated that rehabilitation is not only a type of punishment, but also the best type of punishment that should be embraced by the United States prisons in order to eradicate criminal acts within the nation. Although incarceration has been widely used to create a sense of justice to the victims of criminal acts, it has no assurance of long-term sense of security, as the society only feels secure when the perpetrators of the crime are arrested and jailed. Most criminals are mentally ill, drug and substance addicts, and have relational issues; hence are in need of rehabilitation. It is therefore, recommended that the government should avail enough rehabilitative facilities in disciplinary institutions in order to help in conversion of the law breakers into useful citizens towards attainment of a secure nation. 

References 

Addressing Transgressions: Types of Criminal Punishment: Point Park University (2016). (Online).Retrieved from https://online.pointpark.edu/criminal-justice/types-of-criminal-punishment/ 

Albert, A. (2003).  "The Changing Purposes of Criminal Punishment: A Retrospective on the Past Century and Some Thoughts about the Next" . The University of Chicago Law Review.  70  (1): 1–22. 

Benson, E. (2003). Rehabilitate Or Punish? Psychologists Are Not Only Providing Treatment to Prisoners; they’re Also Contributing to Debate over the Nature of Prison Itself. 34(7): 46. 

Day, A. (2015). Crime and Punishment and Rehabilitation: A Smarter Approach. (Online).Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/crime-and-punishment-and-rehabilitation-a-smarter-approach-41960 

Demleitner, V. (2014). Types of Punishments: Oxford Handbooks Online Scholarly Research Reviews. (Online).Retrieved from https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199673599.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199673599-e-41 

Grant, H., & Rice, R. (2006), "Treatment of Psychopathy: A Review of Empirical Findings", In Patrick, Christopher (Ed.), Handbook of Psychopathy, pp. 555–572. 

Mccain, N.C., & Gary, F. (2015).  "Obama, Koch Brothers in Unlikely Alliance to Overhaul Criminal Justice" .  Wall Street Journal. 

Punishment as Rehabilitation and Reform: Criminal Law Basics. (2019). (Online).Retrieved from https://www.upcounsel.com/lectl-punishment-as-rehabilitation-and-reform-criminal-law-basics 

Robert, D. (1995). Psychopaths: New Trends in Research. The Harvard Mental Health Letter. 

Rubin, E. (2001). The Inevitability of Rehabilitation: Law & Inequality: A Journal of Theory and Practice. 19(2): 343-377. 

Schaefer, J., & Stefancic, A. (2003). Alternative to Prison Programs for the Mentally Ill Offender. 38(2):41-55. 

Tim, M. (2015).  "Koch Bros to Bankroll Prison Reform" : The Daily Beast. 

Vocabulary.com Dictionary. (2019). (Online).Retrieved from https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/retribution 

Walters, D.G. (2006).  Lifestyle theory : Nova Publishers. p. 42. 

Ward , T. (2010) "Is Offender Rehabilitation a Form of Punishment?",  The British Journal of Forensic Practice . 12(4):4-13. 

Zuckerman, M. (1991)  Psychobiology of Personality  Cambridge University Press. p.390.