Abstract
Correction is a very vital component of the criminal justice system. Without a correction system, it is possible for individuals to commit crimes repeatedly with no fear of punishment. Correctional facilities are thus needed to guarantee the safety of members of the public.
This paper provides a description of punishment models and alternative correction strategies. The models of punishment identified are associated with justifications for correction. The punishment models include retribution, rehabilitation, deterrence, and incapacitation. Community correction has been identified as one of the alternatives to correction by the criminal justice system.
Introduction
For every society to function effectively, it is imperative to have a well-managed correctional system. Time and again, people tend to go against the law. Correctional facilities are thus needed to enforce law and order.
This paper presents various aspects of correction. The issues to be discussed include models of punishment and correctional alternatives as well as probation, parole, and revocation process. In addition, the paper also looks at contemporary issues in corrections.
Different Models of Punishment and Correctional Alternatives
Generally, punishment is used to control the behavior of individuals living in a given society. According to Muhlhausen (2010), there are four reasons to justify the need for punishment and these closely relate to the models of punishment. One of the models used by correctional facilities is deterrence. The idea behind this model of punishment is to ensure discourage members of the community from being involved in criminal activities. Incapacitation is the other model of punishment and one that focuses on lowering a person’s ability to commit a crime. To a large extent, incapacitation has to do with subjecting offenders to unbearable confinement conditions that serve as a means to prevent wrongdoing. The other model of punishment is retribution (Muhlhausen, 2010). Based on this model, the punishment given to an offender must correspond to his or her crime. Allegedly, retribution is the oldest punishment model used in the correction process. The fourth punishment model is rehabilitation. The principal role of rehabilitation is to help an offender to reform and become useful to the community he or she belongs to.
Drawing from a study by Albers (2006), the increase in the number of criminals has led to a rise in the cost of managing correctional facilities. To lessen the burden of caring for convicted offenders, various alternatives to a correction have been explored. Arguably, alternatives present judges with options that may be used to deal with offenders whenever necessary. Possible alternatives include community correction.
Probation, Parole, and the Revocation Process
Despite the fact that probation and parole share some characteristics, they target different populations and offer distinct relief to the criminal justice system (Mays, Winfree & Winfree, 2004). Probation gives courts control over the offender. Under probation, the offender is accountable and has to ensure the safety of other members of the public. Ultimately, probation is less punitive in comparison to jail or prison.
According to AMA (2007), it is extremely important to set standards for probation and parole officers that recognize that they are responsible for protecting the community and for facilitating successful re-entry into society. It is improper for officers to let offenders continue living freely when they pose serious danger to the public. Officers must therefore be very careful when deciding on matters of probation and parole. If it is possible to determine without a doubt that pardoning an offender may cause more harm than good, probation or parole may be revoked in order to ensure the safety of others. Parole on the other hand permits the executive to exercise a similar measure of control and to provide equivalent security for a seemingly dangerous group of people.
Typically, non-criminal violations of parole or probation involve the obligation to report regularly to a parole officer, keep a curfew, stay within a prescribed geographic area, and take part in treatment programs (AMA, 2007). A violation of any of these conditions can result in revocation of parole or probation and incarceration.
Contemporary Issues in Corrections
As pointed out by Spangenberg (2004), one of the issues faced by contemporary correctional facilities is the problem of uneducated inmates. There is a concern that most of those incarcerated are poorly educated. Consequently, resettling them into society without equipping them with the necessary skills is quite a challenge. Other issues that must be addressed include changes in policy, views concerning the appropriate model of punishment, and the involvement of all stakeholders including inmates in planning policies that affect them.
The number of criminals needing to go through correction has also been increasing over the years (NAS, 2007). As earlier explained, this leads to increased costs of managing correctional facilities. Because of overcrowding, there is a high risk of contracting communicable diseases. This further increases the overall cost of taking care of convicted offenders. State governments must therefore ensure that they look for alternatives to lessen the burden of correctional facilities.
Conclusion
Based on the discussion in this paper, it is clear that every criminal justice system must be supported by an effective and well-organized correctional facility. Despite the fact that various models of punishment exist, it is important to ensure that the approach chosen is the most appropriate to a given situation. To ensure the success of the correction process, judges must be presented with alternatives that may be used whenever necessary
As far as probation and parole are concerned, officers must make sure that the right decisions are made before an individual can be set free on probation or parole. Finally, efforts must be made to deal with correction issues in the contemporary world.
References
Albers, N. (2006). Alternative Sentencing & Strategies for Successful Prisoner Reentry. Web.
American Bar Association (AMA). (2007).Second Chances in the Criminal Justice System: Alternatives to Incarceration and Reentry Strategies. Washington, DC: American Bar Association.
Mays, G. L., Winfree, L. T. & Winfree, L. T. (2004). Essentials of Corrections. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.
Muhlhausen, D. B. (2010). Theories of Punishment and Mandatory Minimum Sentences. Web.
National Academy of Sciences (NAS). (2007). Ethical Considerations for Research Involving Prisoners. Web.
Spangenberg, G. (2004). Current Issues in Correctional Education. Web.