It soon became apparent that this situation produced a 'revolving door' phenomenon wherein people with serious mental illness (SMI) cycled in and out of inpatient psychiatric care." (Mowbray, et al
Clients in the study group reported improved quality of life and perceived their physical and emotional well-being as improved over the course of the study." (Klein, Cnaan and Whitecraft, 1998) It is indicated by the findings in this pilot study that "
Review and Discussion The United States enjoy the dubious distinction of having the highest incarceration rate for felons among the democratic nations of the world (Sennott & Galliher, 2006). Although definitions of felonies vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction (Estaver, 2005), by legal definition, felons have been convicted of committing serious crimes, including offenses such as rape, murder and kidnapping (Felony, 1999)
1598). Indeed, recently released felons consistently report they experience these types of problems as well as problems securing the basic requirements of living including, most especially, even a place to live (Halsey, 2007)
It is considered to date the most significance face of helping criminals get out of their criminal activities. Even with the onslaught of getting tough on crime call, it remains an integral part of the correction department and procedure (Net Industries, 2011)
The researcher feels an ex-offenders program will benefit not only former incarcerates but also the community at large in many positive ways. Most nonviolent criminals face among other barriers social stigma upon being released into the community (Etters, 2002)
These benefits and others are reported among similar programs. Ex-offenders who participate in rehabilitation programs are more likely to become self-sufficient, supportive members of their communities (Fischer, Geiger & Toch, 1191; Western, 2003; Petersilia, 2005)
Lastly ex-offenders are more likely to face social stigma, whether from potential employers, potential housemates or even potential partners or family members (Petersilia, 2005; Western, 2000). It is common for ex-offenders to face self-esteem issues and related mental problems including excessive anxiety and depression as they attempt to readjust in a society that appears much changed from when they left it, and one that appears unwelcoming and disinterested at best (Lattimore & Witte, 1985)
The study suggests that social support including visits and family oriented interventions was more likely to result in positive attitudes and outcomes and lower levels of recidivism despite interpersonal relationships or existing social support networks. Multiple long-term studies have supported community outreach and rehabilitation programs and suggested positive client outcomes result and overall cost savings when such programs are successfully adopted (Lemieux, 2002; Lipton, Falkin & Wexler, 1992)
This in turn reduces the rate of recidivism among ex-offenders. Other studies show that longer programs are more likely to influence behavior in a positive manner than shorter programs (Lipton, et
Unfortunately many nonviolent offenders simply lack the social support networks, skills and training to make good decisions and build strong lives and support their communities upon release. Restorative justice, that is justice that aims to reform offenders, is more likely to result in a positive outcome for these individuals than simple prison terms or warehousing (Mayers, Unwin & Wilt, 1999)
There is however a growing body of evidence suggesting that rehabilitation programs are not simply a luxury, but rather a necessity to help reform and support our communities. Previous studies of such programs suggest that ex-offenders incarcerated for misdemeanors or other non-violent crimes are much more willing and capable of becoming supportive and contributing members of society if offered the opportunity to take part in meaningful programs that help guide and direct them (Petersilia, 2005; Mayers, Unwin & Wilt, 1999; Latimore & Witte, 1985)
History has shown that warehousing or punishing offenders doesn't actually help reduce rates of crime or reduce recidivism in the community (Mayers, Unwin & Wilt, 1999). In fact incarceration of individuals for nonviolent crimes without rehabilitation typically results in higher rates of repeat offenses (Western, 2003)
"Reinforcements in the program should be largely positive, not negative. And the services should be intensive, lasting three to nine months and occupying 40% to 70% of the offenders' time while they are in the program" (Gendreau, 2011)
Research indicates that offender treatment programs that perform thorough and objective evaluations of criminals and use the evaluation information to tell that treatment planning choices have much better outcomes than programs that do not do such an evaluation. Appraisal allows programs to use their treatment resources like personnel, money, and time in a more cost effective manner by using them where they will produce the best outcomes, rather than wasting them on criminals who will get little from it (Braithwaite, 2012)
The greater disturbances in American civilization in this period encouraged a universal evaluation of the state run criminal justice system. Rehabilitation was promoted by liberals for permitting the state to act coercively against criminals, and was blamed by conservatives for permitting the state to act compassionately toward criminals (Cullen & Gilbert, 1982)
The greater disturbances in American civilization in this period encouraged a universal evaluation of the state run criminal justice system. Rehabilitation was promoted by liberals for permitting the state to act coercively against criminals, and was blamed by conservatives for permitting the state to act compassionately toward criminals (Cullen & Gilbert, 1982)
Deterrence is founded on the idea that people deliberately try to stay away from unpleasantness and seek things that are pleasurable. It follows that by making the choice of committing crime painful; people will choose not to do it (Gendreau, 2012)
The dissimilarity is that the control-centered model would devise community corrections programs that centered primarily on offender observation and control, while treatment supporters would devise community corrections programs that highlighted the delivery of treatment to criminals in both institutional and community locations. Both models look at the effects of crime control and both portray success in terms of individual restraint from crime, rather than alterations in the crime rates in general in a particular community (MacKenzie, 2000)
The dissimilarity is that the control-centered model would devise community corrections programs that centered primarily on offender observation and control, while treatment supporters would devise community corrections programs that highlighted the delivery of treatment to criminals in both institutional and community locations. Both models look at the effects of crime control and both portray success in terms of individual restraint from crime, rather than alterations in the crime rates in general in a particular community (MacKenzie, 2000)