Introduction
Criminology is an important part of contemporary society. It has helped the human race to understand the special characteristics of the social system. Many researchers have written about various issues in criminology. They have cited the available evidence concerning the natural world, degree, administration, power, penalty, and hindrance of unlawful conduct, both on the personal and communal positions. The following is a critique of some of the articles that have been put forth to address the subject of criminology.
Annotated Bibliography
Austin, A., & Hardyman, D. (2004). The Risks and Needs of the Returning Prisoner Population. Review of Policy Research, 21(1), 13-29.
Austin and Hardyman (2004) analyze the important issue of attending to prisoners who have just been brought from rehabilitation and correctional facilities. They assess their risks and needs in society. Austin and Hardyman’s (2004) analysis of several other studies shows how the returning prisoners may be a threat to society and the public. However, their discussions regard the threat posed by ex-cons as being significantly little. These researchers also conclude that the needs of the released prisoners should not restrict their release. The findings of this research are based on significantly little evidence and a small sample over a short period. Therefore, such findings may not be completely useful in concluding.
Bahr, S. (2005). The Reentry Process: How Parolees Adjust to Release from Prison. Fathering, 3(3), 243-265.
Bahr’s (2005) research is similar to the article by Austin and Hardyman (2004) since the two studies investigate almost similar characteristics and factors that have to be considered when handling people who have been freed from jail. Bahr’s article investigates the reentry of parolees into society. It also examines some of the factors and variables that determine the probability of returning to prison. This study is commendable because it establishes positive factors that relate to individuals who stay out of prison. An important variable that the research manages to demonstrate is family support. Prisoners and parolees are less likely to get adequate family support after their release from prison.
Bayse, J. (1991). Family Life Education: An Effective Tool for Prisoner Rehabilitation. Family Relations, 43(3), 254-257.
Bayse (1991) investigates the relationship between family support and prisoners’ rehabilitation success. The study utilizes data from a population that is similar to the one used in Bahr’s (2005) study. The participating inmates are 54. After participating in a family program, the number of inmates who report narcissism reduces significantly. This research is an ingenious method of demonstrating how family relationships positively contribute to rehabilitation.
Belenko, S. (2006). Assessing Released Inmates for Substance-Abuse-Related Service Needs. Crime and Delinquency, 52(1), 94-113.
There is often a relationship between criminality and substance abuse. Many researchers have found a connection between the two. Belenko (2006) is one of the researchers who expound further on the relationship between drug abuse and crime. He assesses the need for drug-related services for inmates who are released from prison. He also evaluates the possibility of using new assessment tools that are psychometrically sound in the management of risks that prisoners pose to society. The researcher proposes several themes and suggestions in the management of drug conditions. This study is important since it provides additional management for prisoners who have drug abuse problems.
Belenko, S., & Pugh, J. (2005). Estimating drug treatment needs among state prison inmates. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 77(1), 269-281.
Belenko and Pugh (2005) investigate the need for treatment of inmates who have been using drugs. They begin with an analysis of studies that show drug abuse as a positive relationship between being in prison and using drugs. Their assessment reveals a large relationship between drug abuse and crime in the US. Their data from over 275 prisons and over 14000 prisoners reveal that there is inadequate treatment for these prisoners about their drug problem. This study is useful because it allows the provision of important knowledge on the rehabilitation of prisoners in the line of drug abuse.
Hairston, F. (1990). Family ties during imprisonment. Do they influence future criminal Activity? Federal Probation, 52(1), 48–52.
Hairston (1990) emphasizes the relationship between imprisonment and family ties. Readjustment while in prison is linked to the support that individuals have along the family lines and the resources that are available to them. Family relationships are noted as influencing how prisoners relate with their inmates, the guards, and whether they engage in criminal activities upon release from prison. Hairston (1990) states that the number of programs that are aimed at family support is increasing. However, Hairston (1990) states that the available family programs for inmates have relatively little contribution in reducing recidivism. The study incorporates the findings of other studies in its decision-making. Hence, it is less authentic in its conclusions.
Holtfreter, K. (2004). Poverty, State Capital, and Recidivism among Women Offenders. Criminology and Public Policy, 3(2), 185-208.
Recidivism among women prisoners is a topic that has little studies around it. Holtfreter (2004) makes an important contribution to the topic by carrying out the above study, which investigates the relationship between state support for female offenders and the success of rehabilitation. The research is well organized with special statistical tools being used to support the available conclusions. The conclusions include the finding that addressing short-term needs for female inmates is associated with a significant reduction of recidivism. Judging by the professionalism that the study is conducted through, the conclusions are appropriate, and the research is well-grounded.
Laub, J. (1998). Trajectories of Change in Criminal Offending: Good Marriages and the Desistance Process. American Sociological Review, 63(1), 225–38.
Laub (1998) studies the relationship between family and criminal offenses. The main difference between this study and the above studies is that the researcher studies family about marriage. The conclusion is that marriage is significant in creating family bonds, which are associated with reduced criminal offenses. The study is timely. It supports the available evidence on the relationship between crime and social support. The methodology that is used in the study has not been proven over the last few decades. However, the conclusions are supported by the available research in the area.
Levinson, J., & Morenson, W. (2006). Risk Assessment in Child Sexual Abuse Cases. Child Welfare, 75(1), 59-82.
Levinson and Morenson (2006) assess the available evidence on risk assessment in child sexual abuse cases. The initial impression in their study is that there is progress in the risk assessment for these children. These researchers propose the use of better tools in the prediction of child abuse, especially sexual abuse. The current management of child abuse cases is better than what was the practice over the last few years. The authors insist on better measures in the prediction of maltreatment for children. This research is an important addition to the available evidence on the management of child abuse, although it only provides suggestions with no particular measure being suggested.
Messina, N. (2006). Predictors of Prison-Based Treatment Outcomes: A Comparison of Men and Women Participants. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 32(2), 7–28.
In this last research, the prison-based treatment for some of the prisoner conditions is assessed about other forms of treatment. The researcher evaluates the differences between female and male populations based on the results reported for each gender (Messina, 2006). This research is commendable since it offers an important link for some of the researchers who look for information on the topic. The methodology is effective and important in the conclusions. Therefore, the research can be used in other references to arrive at other conclusions.
Conclusion
The above studies demonstrate the relationship between social interactions and crime. Most of them support the theory that prisoners are better corrected when their social bonds are intact. The studies also propose several interventions where the social bonds are broken. The summarized information can be useful for any researcher who wants to get a rough picture of the subject of criminology.
Reference List
Austin, A., & Hardyman, D. (2004). The Risks and Needs of the Returning Prisoner Population. Review of Policy Research, 21(1), 13-29.
Bahr, S. (2005). The Reentry Process: How Parolees Adjust to Release from Prison. Fathering, 3(3), 243-265.
Bayse, J. (1991). Family Life Education: An Effective Tool for Prisoner Rehabilitation. Family Relations, 43(3), 254-257.
Belenko, S. (2006). Assessing Released Inmates for Substance-Abuse-Related Service Needs. Crime and Delinquency, 52(1), 94-113.
Belenko, S., & Pugh, J. (2005). Estimating drug treatment needs among state prison inmates. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 77(1), 269-281.
Hairston, F. (1990). Family ties during imprisonment. Do they influence future criminal Activity? Federal Probation, 52(1), 48–52.
Holtfreter, K. (2004). Poverty, State Capital, and Recidivism among Women Offenders” Criminology and Public Policy, 3(2), 185-208.
Laub, J. (1998). Trajectories of Change in Criminal Offending: Good Marriages and the Desistance Process. American Sociological Review, 63(1), 225–38.
Levinson, J., & Morenson, W. (2006). Risk Assessment in Child Sexual Abuse Cases. Child Welfare, 75(1), 59-82.
Messina, N. (2006). Predictors of Prison-Based Treatment Outcomes: A Comparison of Men and Women Participants. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 32(2), 7–28.