Criminal Justice Essay Example

What are the general strengths and weaknesses of community corrections in the United States?

The topic of community corrections has been discussed in our nation’s justice system for quite some time now. It provides a unique option to the perpetrator to stay in society and make remedies for the crime committed. There are of course merits and demerits in this system just as in any other. The following are the strengths of this correctional reform.
Community corrections allow the prisoner to remain with his family and thus provides ample opportunity to move away from a life of crime. Even with incarcerated inmates, the ones who are regularly visited by family are less likely to return to crime upon release.
Community corrections allow the prisoner to meet the expectations of the justice system while still remaining in society. This will build a boundary around what is legitimate and what is not; in turn reduces the chances of recidivism.
Community corrections allow young offenders and first time offenders the perfect channel to pursue a different course of life as opposed to being incarcerated; most often these individuals meet other criminal elements in prison and increase chances of recidivism.
Community corrections save the taxpayers and the government a lot of money. It usually costs $55,000 a year to incarcerate one person. This cost does not include the expensive litigation and some rehabilitation programs.
Every initiative also comes with negatives and the community correctional system is not immune to that either. The following are the demerits of this system.
The supervision aspect of this program is too intrusive for comfort. Although the prisoner gets to spend time with his family, he also has to put up with very penetrative surveillance. It is not uncommon for parole officers to visit the prisoner during early morning hours and disturb the entire family.
The expenses of each and every family member need to be submitted and it is scrutinized. An expensive gift by the father to his kid that he saved for; by missing his lunch for a week can raise undue questions.
Moreover, the prisoner is expected to make payments for any rehabilitation programs that are prescribed in the parole conditions. This would eat into the earnings in more than one way.
The prolonged low income and extremely intrusive behavior by parole officers can be instrumental in breaking up families or sending the prisoner back to a life of crime even if it wasn’t intended earlier.
Rehabilitation programs that are religiously motivated also do not sink well with prisoners from other beliefs. Hence the core objective is sabotaged on religious grounds.

What barriers do recently released offenders face when they reintegrate back into society post-incarceration?

The primary barrier for released offenders is financial. The hardest hit is the population who don’t have even a high school diploma. This creates opportunities for future crime because there might not be a legitimate option for these former inmates in society. The second barrier is becoming ineligible for certain jobs due to their record with the law. This adds to the recidivism rate especially if they are not reasonably educated.
Acceptance of their presence in society is probably the most challenging barrier of all. Although they had served their sentence, it is going to work out well only if they are allowed to socially coexist with society. The news of a former inmate residing among them usually creates negative ripples in any neighborhood. Finally, the rehabilitation of substance abusers is usually plagued by inadequate resources. Unless they can be rehabilitated from their addictions, the chance of recidivism is always high.
What changes would you make to our current community corrections system, specifically with regards to the release of offenders back into our communities, to make this process more effective for the offender, the community and the correctional organization in charge of the release and supervision?
The changes that are being suggested coincide with the main objective of the correctional system; rehabilitate and facilitate effective reentry. The first change that is recommended is that first time offenders should have the opportunity to have their criminal record erased if they complete their community corrections program successfully. This will serve as a potential chance to really start fresh. This measure has helped thousands in the juvenile system and would potentially end recidivism.
The next recommendation is to allow community corrections for nonviolent criminals only. Every time we allow criminal elements back into the society, they have exhibited their potential for repeating their actions; especially sexual offenders. Hence, we should also keep the best interest of public safety also in mind. The supervision should not be uniform; it should vary in intensity based on the crime, number of times it had been repeated, etc. This will prevent the harassment of first time offenders and encourage a positive turnaround.
Violent criminals should be incarcerated for 70% of their sentences and should be allowed parole only if they complete basic high school education along with a vocational degree. This will allow them a chance at going legit. It is also imperative for the government to provide jobs wherever possible for former inmates and pay for their rehabilitation. The cost at any case is much lower than incarceration.
The public feels betrayed by the justice department whenever a former inmate or paroled prisoner commits a crime not because they would have preferred the inmate to be locked up; they are simply disappointed that the correctional department did not make use of the prison sentence to reform the individual. Hence, there is a need to use the recommendations to improve a plan that could effectively solve our prisoner reentry problem.