Trends in the U.S Corrections
Past
The first discernible trend in corrections was the belief in its
rehabilitative ideal. Up till towards the end of the 1970s, the U.S
correctional system was largely seen as rehabilitating those who go through it.
The intention of taking a person through jails or prisons was to make him/her a
better person prior to reentry into the society. In tandem with this trend was
correctional programming which also sought to reinforce the rehabilitative ideal
(Coley & Barton, 2006). For example, correctional education included
secular courses such as history, geology and others. This was in stark contrast
to the largely religious education that had been in existence until the turn of
the 19th century. Education then stood out as the most important
tool for rehabilitating under the jurisdiction of the correctional system. Typical
educational programs at the time included Adult Basic Education (ABE) and
General Education Development (GED). These were administered alongside
vocational educational programs as well as post secondary educational programs.
Another important trend in the past relates to the composition of inmate
population. The period before the 1980s was credited with an even growth in the
sub-groups of inmate populations. The rehabilitative approach to corrections
meant that prison sentences tended to be short. Moreover, inmates could be
released before the expiry of their terms upon satisfaction that they were
already rehabilitated. Few limits on parole release also made it possible for
people to get out of prisons before they are advanced in age.
Present
One major trend currently visible in U.S corrections is an increase in
the number of people under incarceration. Present in this case should be seen
as the period beginning in the 1990. A 2004 report by the Sentencing Project
indicated that inmates under American prisons and jails had already hit the 2
million mark by 2002. The report had relied on figures from the U.S Bureau of
Justice Statistics (BJS). The same year also saw the number of those held in
both state and federal correctional facilities stand at 1,355,748. This figure
was an increase of 82% up from only 743,382 back in the 1990. The current statistics also meant that the U.S
was incarcerating 702 out of every 100,000 of its residents. As late as 2008,
BJS figures indicated that 2,310,984 people were in federal and state prisons
and local jails.
Just like in the past, the underlying correctional philosophy has played
a significant role in swelling the number of those within the jurisdiction of
corrections. Whilst correction in the past was rooted in the rehabilitative
ideal, a shift that took place in the 1970s directed focus towards crime
control. Under this new philosophy, the society is made safe by keeping
offenders away in incarceration facilities. This new philosophy was implemented
through the mandatory minimum sentences. The previous discretion that judicial
authorities previously enjoyed was criticized on a number of fronts. For
instance, there are those who saw them as allowing preferential treatment of
certain groups at the expense of others. Strict release policies are also to
blame for the high rate of incarceration compared to other alternatives. This
is further amplified by equally strict parole rules where those on parole are
re-incarcerated on mere technicalities. For example, some people find
themselves back merely for failing to maintain an employment. The issue of
overcrowding in incarceration facilities has given rise to other interesting
trends.
First, state officials across the country have begun to rethink some of
the costly policies. The change in attitude has occasioned by constant urging
from activists who have recommended a number of alternatives. Thus, there have
been suggestions that states eliminate mandatory minimum sentences. Officials have also been urged to revise
sentencing laws and guidelines so that judges can have discretion once more. States
are already taking the queue from these suggestions. For example, Michigan legislators
repealed many of the mandatory minimum sentences associated with drug offences.
Ohio has also been following through with
structured reforms in its corrections. The success of those reforms has seen
Ohio close some of its correctional facilities such as the Orient Correctional
Institution and one prison at Lima.
A trend is also emerging in which most states revising punishment for
non violent offenders while using diversion for offenders who are facing
problems of substance abuse. At least 18 states have rolled back their
mandatory minimum sentences. For instance, there has been a replacement of prison
sentences with mandatory treatment in some first-offender felony cases in
Texas. Washington also amended sentencing guidelines to divert sentences to
treatment in some non-violent cases. Mississippi also amended its
Truth-in-sentencing law allowing it to restore parole for non-violent first
offenders.
Lastly, states are also adopting better release and reentry policies. At
least 15 states have already made some progress towards this end. Such
mechanisms have mainly been aimed at shortening the time served in prison. Those
states include Texas which introduced parole reforms back in 2000. Colorado
also introduced community corrections alternative to returning parolees to
prison for certain non-violent offenders.
Future
It is not possible to state with any degree of accuracy what corrections
will look like in the future with any degree of accuracy. Current trends may,
however, inform what is likely to happen in the future. To begin with, the punitive approach to
corrections remains in force. Barring reforms away from this approach, prison
population is likely to increase (Whitehead, Jones &Braswell, 2008). This
trend will, however, be halted by many other considerations such as costs. A
number of states have already initiated measures to stem the trend before it
becomes difficult to contain. Thus, the number of people in incarceration will
continue to rise but at a rate lower than the current. Besides population of
inmates, the future is also likely to witness a return to the rehabilitative
ideal of corrections. The effectiveness of corrections will be a key
determinant of which direction to take.
Correction is also likely to adopt a restorative philosophy in the
future in which focus will shift to repairing the damage done to victims and
the community. Achieving this could take the form of negotiation, mediation and
the empowerment of victims. It is a trend that is likely to continue given the
concern for the victims is currently popular.
Furthermore, the current trend of privatization of correctional
facilities is also likely to continue into the foreseeable future (Whitehead,
Jones &Braswell, 2008). Some companies currently operating correctional
facilities include Corrections Corporation of America. As of 2006, the numbers
of state and federal prisoners in private prisons were 86,000 and 28,000
respectively. Preference for private institutions has been borne out of the
need to manage costs.
Budgetary and Managerial Impact of Future
Trends
Future increases in the number of people interfacing with the criminal
justice system will portend serious budgetary and managerial implications for
all sectors of the system (Neubauer & Fradella, 2011). In the case of
courts, a swell in criminal rolls will exert serious pressures on their
budgets. In the current period of budgetary constraints, the courts may have to
come up with ingenious ways of dealing with the budgetary constraints. Proposals have been suggested that federal
courts could narrow the definition of federal crimes so as to reduce their
caseloads. Sharing of administrative resources is also another alternative cost
saving measure. Similar measures are likely to be taken in state courts.
Just like the courts, law enforcement will also have to cope with
challenges emanating from future trends. An underlying future trend is that
there will be a spike in the demand for law enforcement services. Consequently,
there will be a need for more personnel in law enforcement. This will in turn
require more budgetary allocations for law enforcement. Governments, both state
and federal, are already facing budgetary constraints meaning budgetary
allocations are more likely to reduce than increase. Law enforcement across the country is already
experiencing the consequences of such a move. For instance, the mayor of Tulsa
in Oklahoma had to eliminate 89 sworn positions to cut costs.Moves like this
automatically leads to increased workloads on the few officers who have to deal
with the same level of cases. Officers working under such intense pressure are
likely to suffer from morale problems. It will, therefore, be important to adopt
relevant approaches to managing that kind of workforce.
References
Coley, R.J., & Barton, P.E. (2006).Locked Up and Locked Out: An Educational
Perspective on the U.S Prison
Population. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Services.
Neubauer, D.W., & Fradella, H.F.
(2011).America’s Courts and Criminal Justice System, 10th Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Whitehead,J.T.,Jones,M.,&
Braswell,M.C.(2008).Exploring Corrections in America,2nd Edition.Nwark,NJ:Mathew Bender &
Company Inc.
0 comments:
Post a Comment