PAROLE.   Term Paper ID:20636 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: Evaluates effectiveness of system. Theories, deterrence, recidivism, supervision, alternatives.... More...

6 Pages / 1350 Words 6 sources, 11 Citations, APA Format $24.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: Evaluates effectiveness of system. Theories, deterrence, recidivism, supervision, alternatives. Paper Introduction: ARE PAROLE SYSTEMS NECESSARY? Crime in the United States, particularly violent crime, has been a major concern of the American population for decades. Although incumbent politicians (of whatever political party) usually supply statistics to indicate that the crime problem has been and is being effectively dealt with under their administrations, most people, particularly those residing in the country's urban areas, tend to perceive little improvement in the situation. From the mid-1970s through the mid-1980s, the American prison population increased by 84 percent--from approximately 285 thousand to around 524,000. Per 100 thousand population, the increase was from 129 to 216. Since the mid-1980s, the prison population has continued to climb, however, at a slightly reduced rate. Ne 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. Research has found that shock incarceration parolees adjustedsignificantly more positively during the community supervision phase thandid other corrections sample groups (Mackenzie, Shaw, and Souryal, 1992,pp. Electronic monitoring,shock incarceration (or the prison boot camp concept), and intensivesupervision while on parole are all alternative programs developed to dealwith the recidivism problem (Petersilia, 1992, pp. 42-47). Rather, such programs have typically been characterizedby a stronger emphasis on the welfare of the offender. Offender-oriented restitution bills: Bringingtotal justice for victims? (199 ). 3 -36). Thisapproach, while highly popular among the general public and conservativepoliticians is not supported by most sociologists for either adult or youthoffenders. Washington: NationalCouncil on Crime and Delinquency. From the mid-197 s through the mid-198 s, the American prisonpopulation increased by 84 percent--from approximately 285 thousand toaround 524, . When the level of supervision wascontrolled, the researchers found that shock incarceration paroleesadjusted no more positively to community supervision than did the otherthree sample groups (Mackenzie, 1992, pp. Further, within the general area of the control of socialbehaviors, the several different approaches to such control which have beenadvanced cannot be divorced from one another. 437-454). The problem, however, is that intensivesupervision in conjunction with shock incarceration programs has notproduced any positive effects on the long-term recidivism rate (Mackenzie,Shaw, and Souryal, 1992, pp. The researchers appear to have missed a significant point of theirfindings. If participants do notcomplete the boot camp phase of the program successfully, they are placedin regular prison. Federal Probation, 54(3), 44-52. The findings that recidivism rates have not been affected by any ofthe alternative approaches indicates that neither parole nor the absence ofparole makes a lot of difference. Existing studies in the literature both providesupport for each approach, and find an absence of support for each of theapproaches. Mackenzie, Doris L. Thus, the researcherswere forced to admit that it was likely more intense supervision, asopposed to the shock incarceration, that accounted for the superioradjustment of the shock parolees to community supervision. ARE PAROLE SYSTEMS NECESSARY? 438). Roy, Sudipta. References Austin, James, Jones, Michael, & Bolyard, Melissa. 437-454). The two general approaches to the reduction of criminal activity--attacking the underlying causes, and control of social behaviors--cannot becompletely divorced. Crime in the United States, particularly violent crime, has been amajor concern of the American population for decades. Importantly, the researchers reported that the recidivism rate wasvirtually the same for all groups of prisoners studied (Mackenzie, Shaw,and Souryal, 1992, pp. Federal Probation, 54(3), 3 -36. Offender restitution programs have never been implemented with aprimary goal of providing full and meaningful restitution to victims (Roy,199 , pp. The essence of the major problem confronting criminal corrections inthe United States is the unacceptably high recidivism rate among theoffenders who are processed through the system. Further, theresearchers found that intervening variables offered no additionalexplanations of any differences between the four sample groups when thelevel of supervision was controlled. The costs and effects of intensive supervisionfor drug offenders. Shock incarceration dropouts adjusted in a similar manner toregular probationers and parolees. The disposition of criminal cases by the courts has been sharplycriticized for being ineffective in the deterrence of both repeat and firsttime offenses. Those who support the idea of the deterrent effect of stiff penaltiescontend that greater the perceived likelihood of apprehension, prosecution,conviction, and punishment, the more severe the perceived eventual penalty,and the more swiftly it is perceived to be administered, the greater willbe the deterrent effect of the threat. Similarly, the level of supervision is, quite obviously, the keyfactor in the determination of the adjustment of prisoners to communitysupervision, and it is, thus, a waste of time to dwell on how things wouldbe in the absence of the impact of the level of supervision. (1992). Thus, in such circumstances, parole atleast has the value of reducing prison costs. 12-17; Lilly, Ball,Curry, and Smith, 1992, pp. A third potentialsolution is a requirement for offender restitution to victims (Roy, 199 ,pp. Shock incarceration has receivedparticularly good press; however, some evidence has been developed,however, that indicates that shock incarceration may not be effective inreducing the recidivism rate (Mackenzie, 199 , pp. Individuals who think that swift andsure punishment is the best way to control antisocial behaviors typicallyoppose parole, while those individuals embracing the community involvementapproach likely favor parole. 437-454). The success of intensivesupervision in shock incarceration programs, however, is indicative of alikelihood that the concept would work equally as well in conjunction withany corrections program. Petersilia, J. Until, a change inpolitical and corrections attitudes occurs that places primary emphasis onthe welfare of victims, offender restitution programs will not likely beeffective. David, & Smith, RichardC. The growinguse of jail boot camps: The current state of the art. Again, existing studies inthe literature both provide support, and find an absence of support foreach of the several approaches. Nearly two-percent of all adultAmericans are in prison, in jail, on parole, or on probation. 3 -36). Thus, regardless of how well theresearchers contended that shock incarceration parolees adjusted tocommunity supervision when the level of supervision was not controlled, thefact remains that the end outcome is virtually the same for all prisoners. The prison boot camp alternative involves the placing of qualifyingoffenders in a military basic training type situation for a limited timeperiod during which participants receive intensive disciplinary training,along with rehabilitative and self-esteem services. Parole, however, increasingly seems to many publicadministrators to be a viable alternative to the escalating costs of prisonconstruction and prison maintenance. Lilly, J. A second potential solution is a system of intensive noninstitutional supervision of the type that is a part of most shockincarceration programs that would be used in conjunction with correctionsprograms other than the shock incarceration type. A fourth alternative is an electronic monitoring program(Lilly, Ball, Curry, and Smith, 1992, pp. Draft of a forthcoming journal article. (1992).Characteristics associated with successful adjustment to supervision.Criminal Justice and Behavior, 19(4), 437-454. (1992). As gravity is present, however, it is really notrelevant to human behavior that things would be different in the absence ofgravity. Thethrust of these theories is that, by eliminating the underlying causes ofantisocial behaviors, the behaviors themselves will either be eliminated ortheir frequencies of occurrence will be significantly reduced. Within this group of studies, there are included a widevariety of approaches that run the gamut from the use of punishment andsentencing procedures as a deterrent to the commission of antisocialbehaviors to the use of community involvement as a means of reducing thefrequencies of antisocial behaviors. Although incumbentpoliticians (of whatever political party) usually supply statistics toindicate that the crime problem has been and is being effectively dealtwith under their administrations, most people, particularly those residingin the country's urban areas, tend to perceive little improvement in thesituation. The researchers continued to stress,however, that differences were found between shock incarceration paroleesand the other three sample groups in relation to the intervening variableswhen the level of supervision was not controlled. Parole andprobation tends to be opposed by the general public--particularly forviolent offenders. Boot camp prisons: Components,evaluations, and empirical issues. 44-52). While they acknowledge that controlling for the level ofsupervision eliminates any significant differences between shockincarceration parolees and the other three sample groups, they continue toemphasize that such differences do exist when the level of supervision isnot considered. One school of thought holds that stiff penalties without parole shouldbe levied against offenders as a deterrent to both repetition of thebehavior by the offenders and as a deterrent to non-offenders. Upon successful completion, however, participants areplaced in a community-based corrections program and placed under intensivesupervision. These findings, however, wereunadjusted for the level of supervision. Robert, Ball, Richard A., Curry, G. Intensive corrections supervision is effectively limited toparticipants in shock incarceration programs. That approach is about the same as contending that humansshould base their behavior on the fact that they would float in the air ifgravity were not present. 8). Per 1 thousand population, the increase was from 129 to216. (199 ). Since the mid-198 s, the prison population has continued to climb,however, at a slightly reduced rate. Thoseindividuals subscribing to this chain of thought are likely to favor parolecoupled with social reform. In this context, it isimportant to note that some studies have found that the sureness of theimposition of penalties is as important as is the severity of thepunishments imposed. 437-454). (1992). First, there are those theories that hold that the underlyingcauses of antisocial behaviors (poverty, injustices--perceived or real, andso forth) must be addressed, if the frequency of anti-social behaviors,and, thus, the crime rate, is to be reduced by any significant degree. The prison boot camp concept, of course, is one potential solution tothe problem. Mackenzie, Doris L., Shaw, James W., & Souryal, Claire. Most of the theoretical studies devoted to the discovery ofways to reduce crime rates emphasize one of two general ways to attack theproblem. Several studies have cited thedeterrent effects of sure and substantial penalties for antisocialbehaviors as a means of reducing the crime rate. Federal Probation, 56(4), 12-17. One objective of shock incarceration and other alternative approachesto deal with offender corrections is the reduction of system costs. The second broad group of theoretical studies emphasizes therelationship between the control of social behaviors and reductions incrime rates. program: An evaluation of five years ofelectronic monitoring. A moreimportant goal, however, is improved rehabilitation, because improvedrehabilitation leads to a reduction in the recidivism rate that, in turn,will lead to a reduction in system costs (Mackenzie, Shaw, and Souryal,1992, p. In turn,the elimination or significant reduction in the frequencies of occurrenceof anti-social behaviors will be reflected in reduced rate of crime. Federal Probation, 56(4), 42-47. A third goal of such programs is the reduction ofovercrowding in prisons (Austin, Jones, and Bolyard, 1992, p. 42-47). The Price, Inc. 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.