The growing impact of imprisonment of former inmates has been a significant issue of discussion for several decades now. The criminal justice system in the U.S. and other countries across the globe has for a very time suffered from higher recidivism rates and re-incarceration rates, leading to billions of dollars spent annually in following up these cases. In the United States alone, this effect has been massive and has threatened to crash the criminal justice system, with sources estimating that most of the prisoners after release from prison often end up where they started-repeating their previous criminal activities. Recidivism is the general term used to define the relapse of unlawful or illegal behavior that can lead to a wide range of outcomes, including re-arrest, re-imprisonment, and re-conviction (Fazel & Wolf, 2015).
Psychoanalysis and rehabilitative treatment through restorative justice and correctional counseling are one of the few efforts that the government can use to address issues with reoffending and recidivism. In particular, restorative justice, according to Dhami, Mantle, & Fox (2009), can assist prisoners in making peace with the community members as well as reconcile with victims, which are two key processes that can initiate their smooth reentry into society following their release from prison. Dhani, Mantle, & Fox further believe that failure to provide this smooth reentry pathway to inmates can sometimes lead them to re-offend, which can sometimes send them back to prison, a finding that is today creating overpopulation in U.S. prisons. There are various statistics at present pointing at the high rates of recidivism rates and state expenditure in maintaining state-owned correctional facilities.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
According to Agenyi (2017), a report released by the Pew Center, a significant government watchdog, in 2011 estimates that the mean countrywide recidivism rate for released inmates stands at an astonishing 43 percent. However, the Bureau of Justice approximates that 68 percent of all the prisoners (405,000) released from jail in 2005 in 30 states were detained for a new offense within three years of their discharge. Within five years, roughly 77 percent of these prisoners were arrested.
This snowballing rate of incarceration is a cause to worry not only for the police but also for the entire criminal system, including the judiciary. For one reason, it has caused a dramatic filling to capacity of the prisons, creating congestion and discomfort among inmates. Reports also indicate that gangs and other crimes continue to thrive in American prisons, with gang leaders jailed in prison often still making tactical decisions even within those detention centers. Regardless, reports also indicate that taxpayers are spending a fortune annually to maintain these inmates. Henrichson & Delaney (2012) of the Vera Institute of Justice contend that taxpayers are paying roughly 13.9 percent more to support inmates than state correction budgets. Vera’s survey was conducted among 40 states and aimed to establish a paradigm of calculating the amount of money spent annually to maintain inmates and the ultimate impact on the state economy.
Whereas the United States judicial system has traditionally directed its efforts and resources at only the front end of the structure, it has failed to exert a similar endeavor at the tail end: reducing the chances of recidivism among former inmates. This is indeed one of the significant issues that are continually affecting the U.S. justice system considering that about 95 percent of jailed persons will be released at some point in life back to the community. Restorative justice and correctional counseling are, therefore, touted as one of these critical solutions to the issue of reoffending among formerly incarcerated prisoners. According to Angenyi (2017), this forms part of the great crusade campaigning for the closing of Rikers Island, one of the notorious correctional facilities in New York City, and focus on developing societies to break the monotony and cycle.
Therefore, this study is critical as it focuses on primarily breaking away from the traditional focus on giving inmates harsher penalties as retribution or state punishment. Previous studies have indicated a possibility of restorative justice and correctional counseling reshaping and impacting the mentality of inmates, which can positively influence their perception of crime. Among the many benefits of this program include reducing reoffending rates, lowering the amount of money spent on prisons, freeing up prisons, healing childhood trauma among offenders, and initiating a critical process for the reentry of prisoners into society after a spell in prison. The section below will focus on the general benefit of the integrated restorative justice and correctional counseling program.
Research Aim
The primary objectives of this research paper include:
To investigate the potential benefits of restorative justice and correctional counseling in prison.
To investigate examples of reconstructive justice and correctional counseling programs in prison.
Literature Review
The rates of recidivism and reoffending are alarming currently on the global stage, and its impacts are also overwhelming to both the justice systems and the taxpayers. Therefore, it is critical to creating strategies that can assist reduce reoffending rates to free state prisons from overcrowding, a factor that is also contributing to the snowballing billions of taxpayers’ money spent to maintain them. One such active strategy experts believe the administration can use to achieve this objective is creating a system that is solely focused on restorative justice and correctional counseling (Dhami, Mante, & Fox, 2009). Restorative justice refers to a string of criminal justice strategies that are primarily focused on the psychotherapy and rehabilitation of the offenders or inmates through reconciliation efforts with the community members as well as victims.
Various statistics genuinely confirm why restorative justice and correctional counseling is a necessity not only in the U.S. penitentiaries but other global prisons today. For example, research conducted by Fazel & Wolf (2015) has identified rates as high as 50 percent in several jurisdictions across the globe. According to the study, inmates represent the highest-risk category of incarceration after their release from jail, with extremely high related costs and an extensive contribution to the community’s violence and criminality.
Fazel & Wolf (2015) used a cross-sectional study model to investigate the rates of recidivism in the U.S. and other 20 countries worldwide. The researchers searched for relevant articles in popular search engines such as Google Scholar, Google Web, and MEDLINE. They performed both targeted search for approximately 20 nations as well as non-country-specific searches. In their search, the researchers combined a nation’s name with words like reconviction, re-imprisonment, repeat offending, and recidivism. Furthermore, for validity purposes, the authors used the most recent data and also consulted with various criminal justice systems for current information and clarification on specific issues. Some of the inclusion criteria considered factors like geographical, outcome measurements, populations, and data extraction. As for the geographic and population aspects, the researchers only extracted official countrywide data and included articles containing prisoner samples respectively.
The results of the study revealed that the U.S. and England were the only two countries with higher rates of recidivism compared to Nordic nations. The two-year rates within the Nordic countries were significantly elevated, including Norway (20 percent) and Sweden (43 percent). Countries of the United Kingdom also reported high one-year rates, including England and Wales (45 percent) and Northern Ireland (25 percent). One specific study comparing the state recidivism rates in the U.S. revealed that Minnesota had the highest reoffending rate at 61 percent while Oregon had the lowest at 23 percent.
The high rates of recidivism in the U.S. have also been a significant concern over the years, which is the primary focus of this study. For example, a report by Angenyi also (2017) indicates that just within three years after release from prison, approximately 70 percent of prisoners will re-offend and face legal punishment, and a half of this figure will be back in jail. According to the study, this is because of institutional and personal characteristics, ranging from an individual’s social cycle of friends, state-level policies, family, to the community environment. As one of the reasons such individuals get back in prison, Angenyi thinks the challenge of fitting back in the routine or normal life in society contributes significantly. Prisoners often face the challenge of reestablishing ties with other community members as well as family members. Faced with the reality of a new criminal record and a poor educational background as well as work history, new prisoners often tend to find solace in returning to high-risk places.
Various researchers have also linked these high reoffending and re-imprisonment rates to millions of dollars spent by the U.S. justice system annually to maintain its penitentiaries, which is a burden to the taxpayers and a significant development setback. According to Henrichson & Delaney (2012), two of the critical reports of the Vera Institute of Justice, the number of prisoners in the country have grown by a staggering 700 percent since the 70s. The report further indicates that taxpayers cough a combined $39 billion annually to maintain inmates, which is about $5.4 billion higher than the $33.5 billion stated in correction budgets.
The need to reduce these colossal amounts of money spent on maintaining prisons is the principal reason a restorative justice and correctional counseling is critical. According to Dhami, Mantle, & Fox (2009), revealed that restorative justice and correctional counseling could substantially assist in integrating prisoners into society following their release from prison. Mills, Barocas, & Ariel (2013) believe that the present justice system has directed much effort at rehabilitating prisoners outside prisons rather than inside these walls where it is genuinely necessary and needed.
Dhami, Mantle, & Fox argue that correctional counseling can significantly address issues with victim awareness and offending behavior. Various programs that concentrate on victim-offender mediation, community service work, and multiple prison systems can radically impact the psychology and thinking of inmates towards reoffending. In particular, the aspect of community service and fitting back to the society can assist victims in reinterring society smoothly, especially after their release from prison because most of them often struggle to gel with family and other community members (Day, Kozar, & Davey, 2013). A cross-sectional study conducted by Sherman et al. (2015) reveals that restorative justice can significantly reduce repeat offending. The researchers searched for a total of 519 articles and included only 19 of them in their study, which only assessed the impacts of restorative justice on recidivism rates within two years of conviction. The researchers found that restorative justice was a more cost-effective method or reducing repeat offending.
Methodology
This paper will primarily use a qualitative explanatory approach to discuss the benefits and most appropriate restorative justice and correctional counseling methods the justice system can embrace within the prison. Relevant information and data about the recidivism rates, restorative justice methods, correctional counseling, and other topics will be searched in popular search engines, including Google Scholar, Bing, Google, Yahoo, and many others. Government websites will also provide up-to-date information concerning state expenditure. The discussion part will primarily focus on the example of restorative justice and correctional counseling programs that are presently deemed useful in prisons. Besides, and most importantly, the benefits of restorative justice and correctional counseling in rehabilitating patients and improving their reentry into society will be considered.
Results/Discussion
Examples of Restorative Justice and Correctional Counseling Strategies
All restorative justice and correctional psychoanalysis programs presently instituted at various prisons across the country as fundamentally aimed at rehabilitating prisoners by giving them advice and counseling on how to reenter the community. The principal purpose is to assist them square things out with the victims, come to terms with their current situation, and help them address the reasons that led to their incarceration. All these efforts will reduce their tendency to re-offend.
Offending behavior programs
One of the best ways of reducing reoffending among criminals is changing their behavior. Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) is a crucial psychoanalysis tool counselors can use to transform the thinking and conduct of inmates while in prison. One most useful approach is addressing the ‘convict code’ thinking among offenders. According to Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration report published in 2005, most offenders usually have a universal conduct value system, which includes refusing to communicate or cooperate with officials. Addressing issues with the convict code fundamentally entails stressing on things like peer support for change, personal accountability, as well as peer confrontation of bad demeanor among offenders (Day, Kozar, & Davey, 2013).
An alternative to violence (AVP) program is one of the other critical offending behavior paradigms that have proved effective in improving the conduct of prisoners. Adopted in the United States in 1975, AVP workshops engage inmates and trained community members. This voluntary service entails a range of practical activities carried out in an environment of respect, confidentiality, and safety, with the principal purpose of exploring ideas for conflict resolution and other alternatives to crime. Participants learn from each other’s experiences (Dhami, Mantle, & Fox, 2009).
Victim awareness programs
Creating victim awareness is another paramount restorative justice and correctional counseling strategy the judicial system is presently using to reform inmates and reduce reoffending among incarcerated persons (Day, Kozar, & Davey, 2013). Victim awareness essentially plays a central role in allowing inmates to understand themselves and address these internal issues. Some of the victim awareness programs deal with problems connected to hostility and anger. According to Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2005), most of the prisoners suffer from antisocial personality disorder and tend to use violence as a coping technique. The report indicates that most inmates use anger to justify being genuinely treated or convicted unfairly.
The counselor, therefore, should mainly work to identify these emotions and their root causes before engaging the victims in prosocial thought processes of managing them. Dhami, Mantle, & Fox (2009) contend that in most of the victim awareness programs, offenders are counseled to understand the effect of crime on their victims and accept to take responsibility for their actions. Awareness is raised through inmates doing role-plays, writing kindhearted letters, watching films and videos of victims’ accounts.
Community service work
Even though community service work has long been part of the justice system in the U.S., it has never been fully utilized as a redistributive and counseling technique to reform prisoners. In the U.S., for instance, it is presently used to provide offenders with the necessary work expertise, which is assisting in solving employment experience issues. These steps are fundamental as it encourages inmates’ preparation for post-release success by providing them not only the work experience and skills but also an opportunity to interact with community members. Dhami, Mantle, & Fox (2009) believe that community service work offers offenders the chance to reimburse and repay societies for their criminal behavior, which assist them in reintegrating into the culture, and show that they can genuinely transform (Day, Kozar, & Davey, 2013).
Benefits of Restorative Justice and Correctional Counseling
Restorative justice and correctional counseling serve several vital purposes not only to the judicial system but also to the community, criminals, and the victims (Suttie, 2015). Some of the core principles and values of the program include empowerment, empathy, honesty, inclusiveness, respect, personal accountability, fairness, voluntary participation, communication, transformation, equality, healing, and problem-solving (Dhami, Mantle, & Fox, 2009). As such, despite just providing an opportunity for reconciliation and mediation between prisoners and victims, the main objectives of reconstructive justice and correctional counseling include:
Assisting inmates to take responsibility for their crimes, agree to the damage they have caused to the victims, recognize the awareness of their victim's requirements, and offer them with a chance to make improvements to both their victims and society (Day, Kozar, & Davey, 2013).
Aiding victim of crime, their families, and societies communicate their requirements to the criminal and grow awareness on how best the penitentiaries are helping the lawbreaker rehabilitate.
Fostering mutually beneficial ties between society and the prison, to make the community aware of the jail's effort in aiding in the resettlement and reintegration of inmates following their release from prison, and maintaining the offender’s family ties (Day, Kozar, & Davey, 2013).
These includes designing a judicial culture and system that humanizes offenders, giving them a respectable standard of living through keeping the secure and sage, offering them with opportunities to change by engaging them productively in community service, encouraging positive ties between prisoners and staff, and addressing conflicts using better approaches of dispute resolutions (Suttie, 2015).
Conclusion
In summary, it can be deduced that the increasing effect of recidivism among former inmates has been a significant issue of concern to the judicial systems in various parts of the world. This has led to overcrowding in prisons leading to states spending billions of dollars annually to maintain these inmates. Psychoanalysis and rehabilitative treatment through restorative justice and correctional counseling are some of the few efforts that the government is presently using to address these issues with reoffending and recidivism. Some of the critical programs the federal government is currently implementing range from offending behavior program, community service work, and victim awareness programs. All these efforts are founded on several important philosophies of restorative justice, including empowerment, empathy, honesty, inclusiveness, respect, personal accountability, fairness, voluntary participation, communication, transformation, equality, healing, and problem-solving. The outcomes of these programs are thus unrivaled in transforming the entire justice system, ranging from assisting inmates in taking responsibility for their crimes to designing a legal culture and system that humanizes offenders. The country can implement most of these actions in other regions to reduce the reoffending rate, save funds, reintegrate offenders to society smoothly, and protect the community.
References
Agenyi, J. (2017). Recidivism in the United States: An overview. Atlas Corps. Retrieved from https://atlascorps.org/recidivism-united-states-overview/
Day, A., Kozar, C., & Davey, L. (2013). Treatment approaches and offending behavior programs: Some critical issues. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18 (6), 630-635.
Dhami, M. K., Mantle, G., & Fox, D. (2009). Restorative justice in prisons. Contemporary Justice Review, 12 (4), 433-488.
Fazel, S., Wolf, A. (2015). A system review of criminal recidivism rates worldwide: Current difficulties and recommendations for best practice. PLOS ONE, 10 (6). Retrieved from https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0130390
Henrichson, C., & Delaney, R. (2012). The price of prisons. Vera Institute of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.vera.org/publications/price-of-prisons-what-incarceration-costs-taxpayers
Mills, L. G., Barocas, B., & Ariel, B. (2013). The next generation of court-mandated domestic violence treatment: A comparison study of batterer intervention and restorative justice programs. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 9 (1), 65-90. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11292-012-9164-x
Sherman, L. W., et al. (2015). Are restorative justice conferences effective in reducing repeat offending? Findings from a Campbell systematic review. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 31 (1), 1-24.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2005). Substance abuse treatment for adults in the criminal justice system: 5 major treatment issues and approaches . Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP), 44. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK64124/
Suttie, J. (9 June 2015). Can restorative justice help prisoners to heal? Greater Good Magazine, https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/restorative_justice_help_prisoners_heal
