Recidivism
Recidivism
Introduction
Recidivism refers to the act of an individual repeating undesirable behavior after experiencing a negative consequence of the behavior. It also refers to the act of repeating unwanted behavior after treatment and trained how to extinguish the behaviors. In addition, recidivism refers to the number of prisoners rearrested. Recidivism is measured by the criminal acts that lead to rearrest and reconviction three years after release. The number of prisoners who repeat undesirable behavior has increased for the past years. Statistics from BSJ (2012) showed that 1180,469 prisoners on parole were likely to be reincarnated in 2007. This included people who were under parole supervision in January and those that entered parole during the year. In 2007, 16% of the parolees returned to incarceration. The number of inmates rearrested in 1994 accounted for 67.5% of prisoners released in 15 states. A total of 300,000 inmates were released from the states.
Another study of inmates showed that the number of inmates rearrested accounted 62.5% of those released. 67.5% of the 272,111 inmates released in 1994 were rearrested for committing a felony within three years. 49% were reconvicted and 25.4% sentenced again for committing a new crime. The inmates accumulated to 4.1 million arrest charges before their recent conviction and 744,000 charges within three years of release. Robbers, burglars, larcenists and motor vehicle criminals accounted for 70.2%, 74.0%, 74.6% and 78.8% of inmates rearrested. 77.4% and 70.2% of inmates rearrested sold stolen property and illegal weapons. 2.5% committed rape and 1.2% homicide (BSJ, 2012). Modifying the probation programs can help reduce the recidivism rate in the society. The criminal justice system should improve compliance of treatment among probationers to reduce recidivism. It should provide training to the probationers to enable them get employment and deter recidivism.
Recidivism
Recidivism has become a significant problem in the United States and other countries due to increase in number of prisoners rearrested and reconvicted. The criminal justice has used probation to punish criminals. Probation refers to a sentence whereby an inmate is released from prison, but is still under the supervision of the court. Probation is a testing and trial period. Probation can be given for a certain time or the sentence of the inmate can be suspended if he or she shows acceptable behavior. The criminal justice system sentences a lot of inmates to probation than to any other sanctions. The number of inmates on probation is high compared to the inmates on prisons and jails. The criminal justice system does not use probation to sentence first time offenders, but also criminals who have committed serious crimes. The criminal justice system sentences offenders to probation because of various reasons. Probation reduces the cost of managing the criminal justice system, prisons and jails. Though probation is vital in reducing crime in the society, little is known about its effectiveness.
Several researchers have examined the effectiveness of probation in reducing recidivism. Worall, Schram, Hays et al, (2001) examined the effectiveness of probation in California. Worall, Schram, Hays et al, (2001) claim the number of offenders on probation in California has increased considerably for the past decades. California had 340,000 criminals on probation in 1999. Also, California had 161,000 and 82,000 offenders in jail and prisons. California population on probation rose by 20% during the last decade. The probation programs have also changed due to the increase in number of probationers and crimes committed by the probationers. The criminal justice system has employed different methods to supervise the probationers according to Worall, Schram, Hays et al. (2001). The criminal justice system uses electronic monitoring and banked caseload programs to monitor the probationers. The probation supervisors use emails and computers to track low level criminals instead of traditional methods. In the conventional method, the probationers meet with the probation officer. The probation departments provide social services to offenders including drug treatment, training and counseling (Worall, Schram, Hays et al, 2001).
Probation, case loads and recidivism
States have adopted other methods of supervising and offering services to probationers to accommodate the increase in probation caseloads. States have implemented banked caseloads. Banked probation helps in the supervision of probationers and reduces the supervision cost. However, the right methods should be used to assign criminals to banked caseloads to protect the public safety. Also, states have introduced intensive supervision programs and assign 20-30 probationers to the officer. The probationers get specialized counseling services. The services depend on the offences, background and conditions for probation stated by the court. For instance probation departments put probationers charged with sexual crime, domestic violence and alcohol abuse in specialized caseloads (Worall, Schram, Hays et al, 2001).
Researchers, policymakers and probation officers have expressed different views regarding smaller caseloads and their ability to bring the probation officer and probationers closer. Increasing the contact between the probationers and probation officers will reduce recidivism by increasing supervision level and access to rehabilitation services. However, research has not shown the relationship between smaller caseloads and reduction in recidivism. Studies conducted before to determine the connection between smaller case loads and decrease in recidivism showed that smaller caseloads had no impact on recidivism. Researches assume that smaller case loads enable probation offers to give attention to individual probationers and hence reduces recidivism (Worall, Schram, Hays et al, 2001).
Worall, Schram, Hays et al (2001) conducted a study to determine the effectiveness of probation in decreasing recidivism. They determined whether probation works and improves public safety. The researchers examined the relationship between property crime and probation in California. The findings revealed that probation programs are effective in reducing the crime rate. The researcher noted a relationship between property crime and caseloads. Decrease in size of caseloads reduced crime rate. On the other hand, increase in size of caseloads increased property crime. Further, Langan, Patrick and Mark (1992) discussed the relationship between probation and recidivism.
The researchers used data from the bureau of justice to determine whether probation was effective in reducing recidivism among probationers. The researchers noted that probation is not effective in reducing recidivism. The researchers used data from the national judicial programs. The program profiled all sentences in different jurisdictions for 1986. They used a stratified random method to select the sample. The researchers included a wide range of crimes such as robbery, rape, homicide, burglary and assault. They also included drug trafficking and other crimes. The researchers noted that the number of probationers rearrested and reconvicted during probation increased (Petersilia, 1998).
This was also evidenced in another study done by Pertesilia and Turner in 1986. The researchers utilized a quasi experimental method to carry out the research. They included matching controls and statistical controls to compare the recidivism rates. The investigators used 511 inmates and 511 felony probationers. The inmates and probationers were compared based on the county convicted, crime convicted, past criminal record, age and other characteristics. They followed the participants for a period of 2 years. The inmates rearrested accounted for 72% of inmates. Probationers formed 63% of inmates. In addition, the court charged 53% of the prisoners with new crimes. The court only charged 38% of the probationers with new crime.47% of the inmates were incarcerated in prison and jail. The probationers incarcerated formed 31% of inmates.
Offenders commit crime because probation does not provide adequate supervision. Also, the offenders commit a crime after being released because probation does not prevent recidivism. The rate of probation is high in states that use probation a lot and no adequate supervision. Also, recidivism is high in states where criminals are serious. The recidivism rate differs from state to state and depends on various factors. Geerkn and Hayes (1993) reviewed various studies on adult felony probationers to show the effect of probation on recidivism. The researchers concluded that recidivism differs from one state to another. Some states have high rates of recidivism while others do not. The recidivism rate ranged from 12% to 65%.
Factors that contribute to recidivism and how probation programs can address them
Offenders face various challenges when released and go back home (Petersilia, 1998). The challenges include getting housing, job, treatment and complying with the supervision terms. Ex- offenders depend on the resources, services and amenities in the neighborhood to reintegrate. The criminals are at a higher risk of committing a crime again if they do not access the resources needed to reintegrate successfully in the society. Offenders depend on their neighborhoods after release as they leave prison with social and medical problems that affect reintegration. Several factors contribute to recidivism among probationers. First, probationers convicted of burglary, robbery, property crime and drug offenders depict high rates of recidivism. The offenders commit a crime after release and hence get rearrested (Visher, La Vigine & Farrell, 2003).
Second, offenders who use drugs after release get rearrested and reconvicted. A large number of prisoners suffer from drug and alcohol abuse and hence require help from the criminal justice system. Several studies have shown the prevalence of drug and alcohol abuse among prisoners. For instance, Visher, La Vigine and Farrell (2003) examined challenges prisoners face when reintegrating in the society after release. They utilized 400 male offenders. The researchers collected data from the offenders to determine their views regarding what they will do after release. The research indicated that 66% of the offenders used drugs before conviction. Also, 48% suffered from intoxication after drinking 6 months before arrest. 22%, 25%, 15% used heroin, marijuana and cocaine daily. Only 2% participated in drug and alcohol treatment programs.17% of the offenders preferred to use drugs after release if not arrested. 12% of the offenders claimed that they would use drugs even if they put them at a risk of being convicted. The prisoners return to the society after probation with unresolved substance abuse issues and engage in criminal behaviors.
Also, Huebner (nd) examined drug abuse among probationers in Illinois. The researcher examined the connection between drug use and recidivism among probationers. He also determined how generalized drug treatment and completion influence relationship. He obtained data from the 2000 Illinois probation outcome survey. Huebner (nd) used 3,017 persons discharged from probation in Illinois fro, 30th, October, 2000 to 30th, November 2000. He followed the probationers for 4 years to ascertain the rate of arrests and the time after release from probation. Huebner (nd) noted that drug abuse is widespread among the probationers in Illinois. 64% of the sample had a history of substance abuse. The results were consistent with national researches that showed a high prevalence of drug use among offenders. Most of the probationers who drug and substance use history got treatment (Huebner, nd).
71% got substance abuse treatment.71% of offenders attending a drug and substance abuse treatment program managed to complete. Additionally, he noted that probationers who had a history of substance abuse were more likely to be rearrested and re convicted than those who did not. They also failed more than those who did not use drugs and alcohol before. Probationers with substance abuse history were 1.2 times more likely to be rearrested and reconvicted 4 years after release (Huebner, nd). Also, the courts charged the probationers with drug related activities. In addition to that, probationers arrested before due to drug use were more likely to be rearrested after probation (Huebner, nd). Moreover, probationers who spend time in probation due to drug related crimes were 1.7 times likely to be rearrested for another drug crime. Huebner (nd) claims that participating in substance abuse treatment programs does not lower the chances of recidivism. It only reduces recidivism only for offenders who completed the treatment. Probationers who did not complete the drug treatment program committed crime again (Petersilia, 1998).
Probationers who had a history of drug abuse and did not receive treatment were 1.42 times likely to be rearrested for drug offences. Also, they got rearrested 1.25 times for other crimes. Huebner (nd) noted that probationers who did not complete the treatment or get treatment failed more quickly compared to probationers who finished treatment. Probationers who did not finish the probation had a recidivism rate of 33% annually and 67% for 4 years. Offenders who used drugs and completed treatment has an identical cumulative curves. Non drug abuse individuals had a recidivism rate of 20% annually and 44% after 4 years. Probationers who completed the treatment had a recidivism rate of 12% annually and 37% annually (Huebner, nd). Also, they had a failure rate of 27% annually and 53% after 4 years. An effective probation program addresses the substance abuse problems of the probationers to prevent recidivism. The probation officers provide counseling services to the probationers. They also ensure the probationers attend substance abuse prevention programs to recover from drug abuse and ensure they comply with the supervision terms (Huebner, nd).
Third, income and unemployment rate increase recidivism among offenders. Lack of unemployment leads to recidivism as the offenders engage in criminal activities after release due to lack of employment. This happens if the offenders do not have appropriate skills to enable them get a job outside. Vocational training programs equip offenders with suitable skills required to perform different jobs outside the prison. This makes it easy for the prisoners to reintegrate into the society and avoid criminal behaviors. In addition, low income contributes to recidivism. Low income increases recidivism as offenders commit crimes to supplement their income. Third, the family composition, affects recidivism (Petersilia, 1998). Offenders living with spouse and children having lower recidivism do not engage in criminal activities and hence do not get rearrested or convicted. The offenders integrate with the family and community easily.
Very few prisoners have marketable skills to get employed after release. Also, the literacy level among prisoners is low and this limits them from getting employment after release. A study conducted by Lynches and Sabon (2001) showed a low literacy level among inmates. I/3 of the inmates did not have a job before joining prison, and two thirds got training in prison (Lynches and Sabon, 2001). 27% of the soon to be released inmates participated in vocation training programs. 35% of the inmates took part in education programs. The researchers also noted that the prisoners did not have adequate income. They did not generate enough income from their jobs and hence supplemented their income with illegal activities. A large amount of their income came from illegal businesses and activities. Moreover, only 44% had a job in prison (Lynches and Sabon, 2001). 97% of the inmates believed that finding a job after release was crucial to avoid rearrest. 14% of the inmates sample had a job lined up upon being released. Fourth, the recidivism rate is affected by age. Young criminals have a higher recidivism rate compared to older criminals (Lynches and Sabon, 2001).
Kubin and Stewart examined how neighborhood affects offenders after release and increase recidivism rate. They used data from the US census on persons on community supervision in Multnomah County in 2000. The researchers believed that offenders living in regions highly disadvantaged had a high rate of recidivism. Also, offenders living in areas with high inequality levels had a high chance of recidivism. Alternatively, offenders living in resource rich areas had a lower risk of recidivism. Therefore, offenders returning to disadvantaged and high inequality areas recidivate more compared to those returning to resource rich areas.
Areas that need future research
There is limited research on probation and recidivism, and this has affected the implementation of probation programs to help offenders reintegrate in the society and prevent recidivism. further research on the effectiveness of probation programs in preventing recidivism is needed. Studies reviewed above have shown that probationers commit crime after release and completion of probation. Some of the factors that force the probationers to commit crime include lack of employment, income and the socioeconomic conditions of the neighborhoods. Also, drug abuse leads to recidivism. Research shows that probationers who finish the treatment program are successful than those who do not complete and have substance abuse history (Petersilia, 1998). Also, probationers who do not complete the substance abuse program fail than those who required treatment, but did not get. Drug treatment can prevent probationers from committing a crime after probation, and during probation if they complete the program.
However, additional research should be conducted to determine how the length of the treatment reduces recidivism among probationers. Additionally, further research is needed to determine how training offenders before release and during probation reduces recidivism by enabling them get jobs. This will enable the criminal justice system prepare the offenders adequately during probation and before completing probation to increase their chances of getting jobs. Additional research is required to determine recidivism rate among youths and adults as most studies have focused on adults and the number of youngsters on probation has increased. Lastly, research is needed to determine whether caseloads have an effect on probation and recidivism. Researchers should determine whether smaller case loads have an effect on probationers and reduce recidivism. They should determine whether small case loads give probation officers an opportunity to give attention to individual offenders. The findings from the research will help in allocating probationers to probation officers and prevent recidivism (Lynches and Sabon, 2001).
Conclusion
In conclusion, recidivism is a concern in many countries including US as the number of offenders rearrested and reconvicted has increased. The criminal justice system has used parole to punish offenders and give them an opportunity to rebuild their lives. The probationers comply with the conditions stated by the court and also participate in drug treatment programs. However, many probationers do not comply with the court conditions and participate in drug treatment program due to lack of resources. Offenders rely on resources in the society to reintegrate. They require training, treatment and employment in order to reintegrate in the society. However, most offenders do not access the resources even when put in probation and this forces them to commit a crime. The offenders do not get employment easily due to lack of enough skills and low literacy level.
This compels them to commit crimes to raise income and survive. Also, the offenders do not access drug treatment programs due to limited programs. Those who access the programs do not complete them and this increases the chance of committing a crime. Probation can only be effective in reducing and preventing recidivism if the criminal justice system improves services provided to offenders. The criminal justice system should help the offenders get treatment and ensure they comply with the treatment requirements and complete. They should also address issues related to the offender’s neighborhoods such as employment, income, inequality among others. Addressing the issues will create an appropriate environment for the offenders to reintegrate. It will also ensure the offenders get accepted in the society and get societal support. This will reduce the risk of the offenders on probation committing crime, taking drugs and being rearrested (Lynches and Sabon, 2001).
Reference
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
