Case management, post-discharge, is an integral part of working with clients who suffer from severe mental illnesses. Post-discharge is when the real opportunity to recover begins. Being able to recover and learn how to cope, is a very real option for those who struggle with mental illness if they have the proper supports and plans in place. Recovery can be defined in social work, as the clients new found, self-defined success within the community (Kondrat &Early, 2010). It is therefore, our job as social workers, to create and develop post-discharge plans for our clients that will help them strive and learn how to navigate their communities successfully, while living with a mental illness. This paper will examine the importance of case management
proven as an effective theory (Akers 1998, 200; Agnew, 2005). The general theory of crime and delinquency shares some of the strengths of social learning theory except this specific theory focuses on a bigger picture of what causes crime and is showed through what Agnew refers as life domains (Akers 1998, 200; Agnew, 2005). The theory also focuses on risk factors and explains how people go through these risk factors across their lifetime (Agnew, 2005). The weaknesses of this theory is that it lacks empirical testing just like the labeling theory but a strength is that social learning theory, deterrence theory, rational choice theory, and Thornberry’s interactional theory of delinquency have been empirically tested which supports this theory
Is the Prison Fellowship program effective among successful ex-offenders post imprisonment? Researchers have shown that social traits and the psychological well-being of an ex-convict are both challenging phases in the process of adjusting into society. In a classical experimental design, this study will seek to observe social behaviors and mental health changes among inmates prior to booking, while in prison, and post-imprisonment over the course of two years. The goal of the study is to examine changes over social and mental health qualities between those participating in the program and those who are not. The experimental group will consist of men and women who are active in the program while incarcerated, and the control group will consist
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.
When the American prison system began, it was believed that rehabilitation, the act of restoring one’s character, could be beneficial for criminals to start over. According to Tom Wicker, “The system…began as a reform impulse, the idea that if offenders were isolated, shielded from the public mockery that had accompanied hangings and the stocks, given time to repent, and worked hard, they could be turned away from crime and transformed into useful citizens” (xii). Criminals could become better citizens and have a positive outlook for a future if they worked hard and were secluded from the outside world. Although this idea seems more humane, it did not last long in the prison system because many people believed that any crime committed deserved
Rich et al (2014) discusses how prison provides a “stable environment with regular meals; reduced access to drugs and alcohol and increased access to health care”, many privileges not necessarily attainable by offenders outside of prison. For offenders who are struggling to reach the goals society places on them, prison can be considered an almost pleasant experience. If we consider a homeless person who was in prison for theft it can be understood that having shelter, regular food and medical care would be an improvement compared to their life out of prison. Mitchell, Cochran, Mears and Bales (2016) support the idea that prisons are not effective at deterring offenders. They claim that the prison environment does the opposite in some cases and encourages offenders to commit crime, this is because labelling someone as a ‘criminal’ makes them more inclined to be a criminal. When incapacitated offenders are also associating with like-minded individuals. They are exposed to more criminogenic factors and their offending peers could easily influence their attitudes towards crime (Cullen, Jonson & Nagin, 2011). For first time offenders this can mean they are influenced to further commit
Through the decades, crime and crime control have been analyzed in an attempt to find the causes of crime and decide how to combat them. The United States showed an increase in their prison population in the 1970s when the country turned towards a more punitive justice system. Referred to as just deserts theory of crime, the aim is to inflict as much pain on the offender through harsh prison sentences, in hopes to cause as much pain as the crime they committed. The worse the crime is, the worse the punishment the criminal will endure. The issue surrounding just deserts theory is the vast amount of offenders who return to prison after being released, also known as the recidivism rate. Although just deserts theory does not seek to lower the rate
There are several different programs focused on offenders. These programs range from religious, educational, medical and job training related. The main goal in each program is to reduce the chances of them returning back to their old habit that originally placed them in jail or in other words reduce recidivism. Recidivism is a very important element in the criminal justice system, because reducing or increasing the number of re-offenses in the community could be beneficial or make the community flood with criminals and their behavior. Without a focus on recidivism, officers will be arresting the same offenders repeatedly and the individual will not be getting the help they need, which could be the difference of them being a productive member of society or not. With
In America, the private prison industry was made for necessary profit based off of the management of prisons by large, private companies. In David Shapiro’s insightful report “Banking on Bondage”, he discusses the logistics of the United States prison system, saying “In America, our criminal justice system should keep us safe, operate fairly, and be cost-effective”. Today, the United States imprisons more people than any other nation in the world, including Russia, China, and Iran. Alongside the issues of private prisons, the increasingly apparent problem of mass incarceration has stripped record numbers of American citizens of their freedom, has a minimal effect on public
Incarceration rates have skyrocketed over the last forty years-- which could be interpreted as good or bad. There have been many questions surrounding incarceration directly being linked to a drop in crime rate: both positive and negative. One pair of economical authors, Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner, approached this concept from a mostly-positive outlook: the high incarceration rate was responsible for one-third of the crime drop in the 1990’s (123-124). The authors use high incarceration rate along with innovative police strategies, plummet of the crack market, and aging in the population to make a base argument of reasons for crime drop; however, the main argument they utilize is the legalization of abortions (Levitt and Dubner 120-121,
Research strongly indicates that transitional housing reduces the recidivism rates of parolees. Housing for many released inmates is very difficult to obtain for a variety of reasons, including prohibitions against people with drug convictions living in federally subsidized public housing. The state department of corrections has decided to rent a multiple-dwelling unit in a low-income area and to allow 200 inmates to live there six months following their release from prison. People in the neighborhood complain that this parole housing unit will increase crime in an already trouble area, will endanger local children, and will place an undue burden on local police and social service. So now the question is do you open the parole transitional
By giving the offender adequate guidance to ease the transition into society, but also giving them some independence and control over their own lives, COSA helps offenders reintegrate with significant success. The program also ensures that, throughout all of this, the community as a whole remains safe and secure. COSA, “has the dual role of providing [the offender] with support through the very hostile response from the community and monitoring [their] behavior to ensure that the community was kept safe” (Clarke et al, p. 3). By addressing the community’s needs as well as the offender’s, the program generates impressive results even when the community is initially reluctant to allow offender re-entry. COSA’s multidimensional process allows offenders to reintegrate into society safely and successfully, while also keeping the community safe.
The fundamental basis of the reentry collaboration is that each constituent of the criminal justice system (e.g., law enforcement, the courts, institutional and community corrections) plays a role not only in immediate offender processing and control (e.g., arrest, conviction, incarceration, release), but also in longstanding offender change (e.g., employment, family, mental health, substance abuse, criminality). Since 1999, the Office of Justice Programs has been instrumental in the development of a series of system-wide reentry initiatives, including the Reentry Partnership Initiatives (RPI) (NCJRS, 2002).
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
According to Phelps (2013), as from 1998 to 2007 states that had the greatest increases in incarceration rates failed to observe a corresponding drop in crime rates. On the other hands, states such as New York, Texas, New Jersey and North and South Carolina that lowered their incarceration rates in favor of community corrections programs experienced a drop in crime rates (p.53). Incarceration has also failed in correcting prisoners. Most of the prisoners always go back to committing crimes once released from prison. It has led to a rise in the recidivism rates of prisoners. Recidivism refers to the repetition of criminal behavior (James, 2011). According to the United States Bureau of Justice 2010 statistics report, three-quarters of released prisoners are constantly rearrested for new crimes and more than half of these go back to prison in a period of two to three years after their release. Ex- inmates account for an approximated 19 percent of all arrests (Phelps, 2013, p.55). Criminals who return to the community are also most of the times worse off after a period of confinement than when they entered. It is attributable to the fact that these inmates learn antisocial and criminal attitudes from other