A therapist ONLY addressing an offender 's mental illness may be problematic because offenders have criminogenic needs that need to be treated in order to reduce criminal behavior. The Risk-Needs-Responsivity (RNR) model of corrections and rehabilitation was designed by Andrews, Honta, and Hoge in 1990. This model has demonstrated the strongest research-support on its ability to explain and treat criminal behavior. Andrews and Bonta have shown that in order to produce a successful rehabilitation program, the program must "respect the individual, have a psychological theory basis, and should work in junction with the enhancement of preventative services". This model reveals the importance of going beyond ONLY addressing an offender 's mental illness and providing treatment relevant to …show more content…
The responsivity principle states that clinicians should tailor treatment delivery that will produce the most effective outcomes depending on unique needs of the client. It is important that the therapist considers each offender individually and adequately assesses their cultural, mental, and physical needs. There are several advantages (pros) and a couple disadvantages (cons) to the therapeutic approach of the RNR model. The pros of this model are that treatment intensity is matched with individual risk level, dynamic issues that are directly linked with crime, and that specific treatment is tailored to individual offenders. By matching treatment intensity to risk level, offenders receive treatment that will be most effective in meeting their therapy needs. Giving an offender the wrong intensity of treatment for their risk level, such as high intensity treatment to a low-risk individual, can have negative effects since a low-risk offender may already have protective factors in place. Another pro of the RNR model is that it has the advantage of targeting dynamic issues that are directly linked with a crime; This allows treatment to adhere to problems that may decrease future
Offender rehabilitation has mainly revolved around the Risk-Needs-Responsivity (RNR) model which serves as a framework in guiding interventions towards offenders in the past. However, with the emergence of Good Lives Model (GLM) as an alternative model, competing views as to which works better start to arise. In order to discuss which model is better, there is first a need to compare between both approaches towards offender rehabilitation. The principles revolving around RNR model include the risk, needs and responsivity principles.
It is believed that letting a criminal free from incarceration puts society at risk. Before the reform recidivism rates were high, scaring the public with the idea that criminals can reenter society. When comparing individuals who were sentenced to prison to those in diversion programs, those in diversion programs were more likely to stay out of jail while those who went to jail were more likely to have re-arrests. It was reported that 64% of the treatment sample were arrest-free over a two-year follow up period. Those in the diversion program had recidivism rates as low as 36%; this compares to the group who were given jail time with a recidivism rate of 54% (Parsons, Wei, Henrichson, Drucker, & Trone, 2015).
It is clear that we have not embraced the theory of rehabilitation because we still use prisons to “warehouse” offenders. The concern with “warehousing” is that the offender will more than likely end up back in prison. We have learned that recidivism is a major concern facing society today because offenders have little chance of employment, no funds or housing, and often time’s very little support from family or friends. I stand behind rehabilitation for offenders because I feel like it is the only way to truly stop crime. In
Even after release, the counterproductive, deeply internalized patterns learned in prison are still present (Haney, 2002). In addition, the rate of incarceration of mentally ill individuals is alarming. Suspects will mental and developmental disorders are often unfairly sent to prison without regard to their conditions, leaving them helpless. Mentally ill inmates have an even more difficult time adjusting to life in prison, leaving them at an even higher risk for psychological
Risk/need/ responsivity and criminogenic needs is a model developed to create intervention programs for offenders. The risk level is based on the risk factors that contribute to an offender who can possibly re-offend. For high risk offenders an intensive intervention treatment would be put in place to lower the risk or to completely eliminate the risk altogether. Low risk offenders in most case will not get any treatment because the risk level to re-offend is very low, but resource will always be available if needed per request. In Sally’s’ case; her criminogenic needs would be to first address the fact that her boyfriend is an abuser that is struggling financially with her and often encourages her to drink, she has no family or community
Thus, in order to deal with the enormous influx of mentally ill inmates, criminal justice policymakers and correctional facilities are beginning to shift their focus in priorities and policies to innovative, targeted solutions designed to immediately respond to the present concerns, and address both of the needs that appear on the “front-end” at the point of contact, as well as on the “back-end” with treatment and re-entry reforms. The following are examples of some of these reforms: I. Specialized Training and
Fielding et al. (2002) reported that the higher the client’s risk level (based on previous crimes), the more likely that he or she would recidivate, time to new arrest was shorter, and time to new drug arrest was shorter. Again, this study is limited in size and generalizability. Just as important, the authors found that it was cheaper for a client to go through the program than be incarcerated in prison or placed in residential treatment. This analysis is only valid when comparing the cost of incarcerating a client in prison and the costs for a client to participate in the program.
In this sense, advocates of rehabilitation see the opportunity to use the criminal justice system as part of a larger social welfare”(Wright, 2012, p. 1.6). Correctional professionals can use criminal theory to help them understand why certain criminals do and commit the crimes they have. With criminal theory there are many different theories as to why criminals become criminals. If correctional professionals were to take a class on understanding criminal behavior or criminal theory I honestly believe that it would help them in understanding how to help certain inmates achieve rehabilitation or self confidence. When trying to understand why people commit crimes, correctional professionals should have an understanding on how to treat and take care
Developmental theories look at how offenders start and end their criminal behaviors. All developmental theories, including the two focused on in this paper, pull from social, psychological, and biological factors to find answers. Both of these theories follow along a trajectory or pathway for offenders. Sampson and Laub’s age-graded theory has offenders following along two possible trajectories. They can either follow along the high risk trajectory or the low risk trajectory.
Consequently there are only six juvenile prisons remaining for serious juvenile offenders, and there are currently 1,600 juveniles in state facilities in comparison to the federal facilities costing on an average of $250,000 per juvenile offender (Kelly, 2012). Therefore, In the effort to address as well as resolve the problems with both adult and juvenile prison overcrowding, bother programmers as well as researchers believed that correctional facilities obtained the abilities in identifying high risk offenders and allocating appropriate rehabilitative services in accordance to their criminal needs while assessing their potential for recidivism, at which point the Risk-need responsivity (RNR) model was implemented in 1990 as a means of identifying high risk offenders in need of rehabilitative
The concept of ‘recidivism’ is central to understanding the criminal justice system. Recidivism occurs when a person commits a crime again despite having been punished before. One of the main goals of the criminal justice system is to reduce recidivism but in fact longer sentences may increase the probability of recidivism (Griffiths & Cunningham, 2000). One reason is that the climate within a prison is not helpful to the inmate in making personal changes that can lead to reduced recidivism. However, psychologists are trying to develop intervention programmes that in fact lead to such personal changes so as to reduce recidivism.
The correctional system uses rehabilitation for offenders who were convicted on a juvenile level. Many inmates have serious mental illnesses, some in which require rehabilitation while incarcerated and some who only need rehabilitation to sustain. There is a great difference between punishment and restraint and rehabilitation is a restraint that always an offender to get better if mentally unstable rather than making them feel punished for an act that may not have been intentionally committed. People learn by example, whether it is a child or an adult, even those in prison. The main purpose for a prison is to restrain those who are violent from placing themselves at harm or others, while helping them change their behavior from negative thoughts and acts to positive and nonviolent so that they can return to the
According to Andrews and Bonta , (2010) PIC-R can be summarized into 13 principles. First, is that all behaviors regardless of the behavior being criminal or non-criminal are under control before and after the deviant act (Andrews and Bonta , 2010). Secondly, PIC-R states that interrelated and intra-related variations of an individuals propensity to commit criminal or non criminal behavior are is due to variations in the individuals perceived cost vs. reward analysis of the specific behavior (Andrews and Bonta , 2010). Additionally, the third principle is that controlling variables interact with the individual through dealings if the individuals environment (Andrews and Bonta , 2010). Furthermore, actions and consequences have two types, additive which Andrews and Bonta , (2010) describe as events that introduce stimuli, or subtractive which are described as withdrawing stimuli.
The theory views the offender as either a patient or a victim or both. According to this theory a person who has committed an offense is not morally responsible for the offense he or she has committed because the offense might be the product of an illness in which treatment is required; this type of person is regarded as a patient. When the offense is the product of a dysfunctional social environment the person is regarded as the victim. The advantage of this approach is that it focuses on the offenders, instead of punishing the offenders this approach focuses on repairing and treating the dysfunctional areas that the offenders are experiencing by means of behavioral therapy and other therapeutic programmes.