ELECTRONIC MONITORING.   Term Paper ID:20005 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: Focuses on offenders in home detention. Problems, effectiveness, research efforts, surrogate homes.... More...

8 Pages / 1800 Words 5 sources, 20 Citations, APA Format $32.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: Focuses on offenders in home detention. Problems, effectiveness, research efforts, surrogate homes. Paper Introduction: Problem Williams, Shichor, and Wiggenshorn (1989) studied the problems with house arrest, or home detention, and the possibility of using surrogate homes as a way to overcome certain of the reliability and validity problems that are associated with electronic monitoring. They note that the importance of such an investigation can significantly influence the efficacy of house arrest by means of double-checking those signals emanating from electronic monitoring that prove spurious as well as members of the surrogate house providing information as to the activities of the parolee. Schmidt (1989) studied the use of electronic monitoring of offenders through the United States, where the attendant programs are located, who is being monitored and what kinds of offenses they committed, how the offenders are Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. The research techniques for the Lowe (199 ) article consisted of anintensive review of three electronic monitoring programs. The Bureau of Justice Assistance (1989) posed the research question,"Which type of device is most effective in intensive probation and paroleprograms?" There was no research hypothesis for this monograph. The author notes that this research isrelevant, in that the use of electronic monitoring provides ways toeffectively and efficiently isolate offenders and protect the public. Problem Williams, Shichor, and Wiggenshorn (1989) studied the problems withhouse arrest, or home detention, and the possibility of using surrogatehomes as a way to overcome certain of the reliability and validity problemsthat are associated with electronic monitoring. The goals of electronic monitoringprograms are to provide cost-effective community supervision for offenders,administer sanctions that are appropriate to the given crime, promotepublic safety, and increase the confidence of legislative, judicial andother releasing authorities as a viable sentencing option. The funding for suchprograms can be obtained from a variety of sources, with the federalgovernment being the primary funder. & Wiggenhorn. per day. Further, there was considerable variance relative to thehistory of surveyed programs, their policies and procedures, paroleerestrictions, program and parolee accessibility to agents, programmaticoutcomes, program evaluation, and program funding. Jankowski (1991) posed the research statement that asks about thenumber of adults on probation or parole and how this number differs fromthat of 1989. This research is important to housearrest, or home detention, because it will apprise the criminal justicesystem in general, law enforcement officials, members of the involvedcommunities, and others of the incidence and prevalence of electronicmonitoring. (1989, August). Lowe (199 ) found that evidence of drug abuse, risk factors thatsupport increased surveillance and control, and indigence are those factorswhich dictate the type of offenders who are placed on electronicmonitoring. The research techniques for the Schmidt (1989) article consisted ofaccessing electronic monitoring equipment manufacturers to voluntarilyobtain state and local programs using their equipment; gaining informationfrom directors of electronic monitoring programs for a specific day on suchquestions as program history, type of equipment used, the extent ofelectronic monitoring, how it is being used and by whom. Williams, F., Shichor, D. The author notes that this research will also informadministrators in the criminal justice system of the limitations of eachtype of electronic monitoring device.Research Question Williams, Shichor, and Wiggenshorn (1989) posed the researchstatement that, while electronic monitoring is effective, the equipment isfallible. The level of monitoring activities varied widely, ranging fromFlorida, with 667 electronically-monitored offenders, to Michigan, with461. In addition, the use of intensive supervisionincreased between 1989 and 199 . References Bureau of Justice Assistance. Schmidt (1989) studied the use of electronic monitoring ofoffenders through the United States, where the attendant programs arelocated, who is being monitored and what kinds of offenses they committed,how the offenders are monitored, program features and problems, and thefuture of electronic monitoring. Electronic monitoring ofoffenders increases, (212), pp. Schmidt (1989) posed several research questions to guide theinvestigation. Thus, the author used secondary data to conduct this survey. These two states accounted for 49.5% of the offenders who are underthis type of supervision. (1989). The importance of this research is that the criminal justicesystem in general, law enforcement officials, and members of the involvedcommunities will be apprised of how to select and regard those offenders tobe placed on electronic monitoring. Jurisdictions reported in excess of55, probationers being under intensive supervision, which equates to 2%of all adult probationers. These programsare located in the State of Colorado, the State of Florida, and the Stateof California. The goals and objectives of the surveyed programs also differedconsiderably. By the end of 199 , approximately 7, probationers were under electronic monitoring, which equates to 13% ofthose probationers who were under intensive supervision (1-4). Jankowski (1991) found that there was indeed a significant differencebetween the number of adults on probation or parole between 1989 and 199 .In fact, the number of adults on probation for 199 showed a 5.9% increaseover the previous year's count. The futureof electronic monitoring appears promising, with the National Institute ofJustice encouraging research in this area (1-4). Thereis no hypothesis provided for this research. The data were stratified by:the number of subjects on probation or parole, state, electronicmonitoring, percent of subjects under sanction, and percent of prisonreleases. Therelevance of the research question is that its outcomes will better prepareadministrators in the criminal justice system to make purchasing decisionsregarding the type of electronic monitoring device that proves mosteffective.Research Techniques The research techniques for the Williams, Shichor, and Wiggenshorn(1989) article consisted of an intensive review of the relevant literaturewith regard to equipment reliability problems, the type of offenderinvolved, the surrogate home, and other program features. (1989, January/February). The importance ofthis problem is significant to the criminal justice system, law enforcementagencies, and the community, in that it apprises the involved individualsof the relevant statistics, allows the proper authorities to plan andprovide services, and allows the proper authorities to forecast the futureneeds of the criminal justice system relative to numerous factors (e.g.,inmate housing, community supervision, etc.).The Bureau of Justice Assistance (1989) studied electronic monitoring inintensive probation and parole programs to determine whether the programmedcontact device is more effective than the continuous signal device. Probation and parole 199 . Bureauof Justice Statistics Bulletin, pp. Jankowski (1991) studied the number of adults on probation or onparole to determine how figures had changed from 1989. The legalissues include intrusion into the offender's home, privacy of the offender,and problems with guarantees from self-incrimination, unlawful seizure andsearch, and cruel and unusual punishment. (199 ). They note that theimportance of such an investigation can significantly influence theefficacy of house arrest by means of double-checking those signalsemanating from electronic monitoring that prove spurious as well as membersof the surrogate house providing information as to the activities of theparolee. The research question provesrelevant to house arrest, or home detention, because it speaks to the issueof offender selection for electronic monitoring. The literature is sparseas regards studies that have been conducted on home detention and thevarious techniques that are used by the criminal justice system to thisend. 1-1 . The computer outputwas reviewed during normal business hours or on a continuous basis. Jankowski, L. Therewere several problems discovered with electronic monitoring, includingdifficulty gaining acceptance, improper training, offenders inappropriatelyhandling the equipment, power surges and computer down-times. Fine tuningsocial control: Electronic monitoring and surrogate homes for drug usingparolees. 1-4. Schmidt (1989) found that 33 states had electronic monitoringprograms that were used to monitor 2,3 offenders in 1988, which equatesto thee times the number that used this approach of intensive supervisionin 1987. The offender profile consisted of mostly men,with women constituting 12.7% of the offenders who are monitored for 1988,and the offenders were convicted of a wide range of criminal violations(e.g., major traffic offenses, property offenses, offenses against persons,sex offenses, weapon offenses, frauds, multiple offenses, etc.). Personal Conclusions and Evaluation of Literature The use of electronic monitoring by the criminal justice systemappears to be a viable, cost-effective, and goal-effective vehicle by whichoffenders can be intensively supervised and by which the public can beprotected. The policies and procedures arecritical elements of any electronic monitoring program, and should addressoffender selection, effect on significant others, staffing and caseload,duration of monitoring, fee structures, contact standards, violationresponses, contingency planning, and training. The legal issues ofelectronic monitoring entail intrusion into the offender's home by lawauthorities, violation of the offender's privacy, possibility of self-incrimination, unlawful search and seizure, and cruel and unusualpunishment (1-22). In addition, 53% failed the program and 25 cases were stillpending. Electronic monitoring: A review. For example, the California Youth Authority has the goal ofusing electronic monitoring to provide a supervision tool that can satisfypunishment, public safety and treatment objectives. The researcher reviewed the history of these programs,their policies and procedures, parolee restrictions, programmatic outcomes,program evaluation and program funding. Schmidt, A. These questions were: Where are the programs?; Who isbeing monitored and what kinds of offenses did they commit?; How are theoffenders monitored?; What are the program features and problems?; and,What is the future of electronic monitoring? (1991, November). Lowe (199 ) studied those factors which dictate the type of offenderswho are placed on electronic monitoring during house arrest, or homedetention. Lowe, G. There is no hypothesis forthis research. This research relates to the issue of house arrest, or homedetention, because the outcome will allow the proper authorities to betterplan, provide, and forecast the needed services. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 5(3), pp. Washington, D.C.:Bureau of Justice Statistics. The assumed hypothesis is that there is significantdifference between the number of probationers and parolees for 1989 and199 . The research statement indicates that the use of electronicmonitoring proves effective for the intensive supervision of parolees, butcontinues to manifest problems given malfunctions of attendant devices. Lowe (199 ) posed the research question, "What are the factors whichdictate the type of offender placed on EM (electronic monitoring)? Electronic monitoring inintensive probation and parole programs. Jankowski (1991) compiled data on the number of adults in the UnitedStates who are under some form of correctional supervision, including thosein local jails, or state or federal prisons. The offenders typically pay for sanction, withsliding scales used for charges up to $15. Further, this combination of intensivesupervision may even prove effective for drug-using parole violators. The Bureau of Justice Assistance (1989) found that there are severalapplications for electronic monitoring devices, including curfew, homedetention, and home incarceration. Further, the parole population grew 16.3%between 1989 and 199 . While there are problems with both types of devices, the newhybrid device appears to eliminate many concerns. The research questions posed are relevant to house arrest,or home detention, because they will produce information that provessignificant to the appropriate authorities relative to the background ofelectronic monitoring. Theoffenders were monitored either by continuous signal devices thatconstantly monitor the presence of an offender at a particular location, orprogrammed contact devices that contact the offender periodically to verifyhis or her presence. 173-179.----------------------- 6 As one example, theCalifornia Youth Authority studied 164 parolees on electronic monitoringbetween 1/31/89 and 1/31/9 , to find that 47% successfully completed theprogram. Washington, D.C.: Bureau ofJustice Statistics. The Bureau of Justice Assistance (1989) compiled information from anextensive literature search on the type of electronic monitoring devicethat proves most effective, the applications of these devices, programgoals and objectives, legal issues, policies and procedures, and funding.The monograph was stratified by these subheadings.Results Williams, Shichor, and Wiggenshorn (1989) concluded that the use ofsurrogate homes for house arrest could somewhat overcome some of theproblems with the reliability and validity of electronic monitoring. Theimportance of this research is that its outcomes will better prepareadministrators in the criminal justice system to make purchasing decisionsregarding the type of electronic monitoring devices that prove mosteffective. The author also notes that this research will help theappropriate authorities plan for the provision of such services in thefuture. Thisis because the use of house surrogates allows for the double-checking ofspurious electronic monitoring signals and the provision of feedback on theactivities of the parolee. If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or Click here to request an essay written just for you.