question archive Top of Form Out of the seven theories to choose from, the theory that will be discussed on its influence of policy in corrections is rehabilitation theory in the United States because it provides a combination of earlier criminological theories like social labeling, social disorganization, and rational choice to explain behavior and to provide better alternatives for offenders (Cullen & Jonson, 2017)
Top of Form Out of the seven theories to choose from, the theory that will be discussed on its influence of policy in corrections is rehabilitation theory in the United States because it provides a combination of earlier criminological theories like social labeling, social disorganization, and rational choice to explain behavior and to provide better alternatives for offenders (Cullen & Jonson, 2017)
Subject:LawPrice: Bought3
Top of Form Out of the seven theories to choose from, the theory that will be discussed on its influence of policy in corrections is rehabilitation theory in the United States because it provides a combination of earlier criminological theories like social labeling, social disorganization, and rational choice to explain behavior and to provide better alternatives for offenders (Cullen & Jonson, 2017). They say most rehabilitative programs are non-scientific and deliver little to no results in correctional environments. Policy in corrections is driven by politics as seen with the reformations during the Progressive era in the 1920s initially creating rehabilitation changes to the prison system in the United States up to the 1960s until public fear in the 1980s promoted the “getting tough” narrative have demonstrated its socio-political changes over time according to the authors. Rehabilitation is like early intervention, but it intervenes at a later point in an offender’s life rather than early development (Dennis, n.d.). Cullen and Jonson state that rehabilitative theory is becoming increasingly more popular for correctional policy in recent times of all political parties. The rehabilitative theory is particularly popular among criminologists today as a means of effective treatment for parole releases despite high caseloads on probation officers as noted by the authors. They believe that incapacitation without providing the opportunity for treatment of offenders that choose to have the alternative is detrimental to long-term outcomes for correcting individuals. They say that rehabilitative theory is only effective for individuals seeking rehabilitative approaches as offenders that “spent their whole lives developing into hard-core criminals” who are unwilling to cooperate with officials are likely to yield little to no results at effective intervention with correcting behavior (p. 13). Additional considerations for rehabilitative theory are crime control, punishment, and risk factors according to the authors.
Many policy decisions lack scientific evidence to support the decision-making process of evidence-based correction programs (MacKenzie, 2000). She believes that providing scientific information, evaluation, reevaluation of data, interventions, and proven effective strategies at intervention with correctional institutions are better treatment methods when assessing the techniques of programs. Various state and local budgets focus more on self-interests such as increasing funding rather than emphasizing the interest of correcting offenders that are willing to cooperate back into society as noted by the author. She says that the Department of Justice (DoJ) allocated an estimated over three billion annual funds for assisting state and local justice community efforts to prevent crime. She cites the Maryland Report’s review that was sent to Congress consisting of more than 600 pages and suggesting that the explanation of effective interventions are complex and not simplified enough for Congress to understand the external circumstances concerning crime prevention programs in the community. Some groups that are listed include the police, families in neighborhoods, educational institutions, criminal justice programs, and labor markets that need evaluation and reevaluation to be effective and evidence-based before approving large budget funds by Congress for new programs according to the author. MacKenzie states a similar belief with Cullen and Jonson (2017) that empirically based policy such as rehabilitative theory is better for the long-term as other theories have fewer long-term positive effects for offenders. Deterrence theory is defined as the belief that offenders should be imprisoned and that it lowers reoffending in community sanction, but Cullen and Jonson argue that there is a lack of empirical evidence to support deterrence theory compared to rehabilitative theory. Examples include the living conditions of the neighborhood in question and the politics of the time affecting correctional policy with the notion that corrections in its early development mostly lacked empirical evidence and were based solely on opinions such as John Kennedy’s Reaffirming Rehabilitation according to the authors.
God commands that if there is a lack of wisdom on deciding requires praying to Christ and asking for guidance as people are destroyed for lack of knowledge:
My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children. (King James Bible, 1769/2021, Hosea 4:6)
James 1:5 and John 19:11 state that lack of wisdom requires asking God for guidance and that any person who was put into a government position was allowed by Christ as described by Jesus and it relates to the course material by suggesting that empirically based evidence for correctional policy is required to determine adequate implementation and decision making for senior leadership. In the context of wisdom regarding correctional policy, approach methods should be evaluated on its effectiveness of crime prevention strategies. Cullen and Jonson (2017) believe that social context has historically contributed toward experiences with crime control and public perception because it has a direct impact on correctional policy. Two of the most popular theories in the world of corrections are rehabilitation and deterrence according to the authors. Luke 23:32–43 states that Jesus forgave a criminal while dying on the cross and suggests that second chances are an opportunity that should be given to offenders willing to change their life.
Cullen and Jonson (2017) list the other theories in corrections besides the more popular deterrence and rehabilitation are retribution or just deserts, incapacitation, restorative justice, reentry, and early intervention. Retribution theory in correctional policy is defined as a non-utilitarian approach that puts sanctions and punishment on offenders as noted by the authors. They define incapacitation theory as a utilitarian approach toward offenders by incarceration using either collective or selective by either locking all offenders of a certain crime (collective) or only imprisoning a select number of high-rate offenders (selective). Restorative justice theory is defined as a balanced approach where the offender is forgiven by the victim and accepted back into society after the offender has paid restitution either by a combination of public apology and community service according to the authors. They define reentry theory is defined as mass imprisonment of offenders that continue to return to prison after parole fails with the assumption that the offender does not die in prison because of lacking medical care or execution with two main components: correctional and reintegration. Early intervention theory is defined as preventing criminal activity in the future by using programs for alleged juveniles that have been deemed as at-risk youth to be taken from the biological parents as mentioned by the authors.
