Expert answer:Principles of Effective Intervention
Answer & Explanation:There are four general principles of effective
intervention that have become organizing concepts of community corrections.
They have stimulated what has become known as the “what works” movement. Write
a paper outlining the four general principles of the “what works” movement.
Thesis: Your thesis (which is part of your first paragraph)
should list the four principles of the effective intervention.
Body: The body of your paper (your entire paper excluding the
thesis and conclusion) should give a thoughtful analysis of the four general
principles of effective intervention in a sequential order. Explain what the
principles mean. Look for examples. Determine if the principles are effective.
Explain why the principles either are, or are not, effective.
Conclusion: The conclusion (which is part of the last
paragraph) should, at the very least, restate the thesis.
The paper must be four pages in length (excluding title and reference pages)
and formatted according to APA style. You must use at least three scholarly
resources from the Ashford University Library, other than the textbook, to
support your claims. Cite your sources within the text of your paper and on the
reference page. For information regarding APA, including samples and tutorials,
visit the Ashford Writing Center, located within the Learning Resources tab on
the left navigation toolbar.
undefinedundefined
crj201_chapter08.pdf
crj201_chapter09.pdf
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Chapter 8
Institutional Corrections
8
Learning Objectives
After reading this
chapter, you should
be able to:
• Describe the development of corrections in
America
• Describe the philosophical foundation
of corrections
• Describe the founding
of the prison
• Describe the use and
functions of jails
• Describe some of the
features of living in
prison
© age fotostock/SuperStock
Chapter Outline
8.1 The Development of Corrections in
America
8.2 The Evolution and Development of
Corrections
Colonial America
The Rise of the Penitentiary
Prison Reformatories
20th-Century Prisons
8.3 Custody: Prisons and Jails
The Size, Scope, and Structure of Custody
8.4 Managing Prisons and Jails
Prison Life
Rights and Legal Protections
Issues Facing Prisons and Jails
8.5 Does Incarceration Reduce Crime?
8.6 Chapter Summary
Critical Thinking Questions
Key Terms
Web Links
The Development of Corrections in America
Chapter 8
8.1 The Development of Corrections in America
As we discussed in Chapter 7, the treatment of criminals has changed dramatically over
time. These changes ref lect two broad trends. First, we have moved away from punishing
criminals through the use of torture, the inf liction of bodily pain, and the use of capital
punishment. Today, capital punishment is not part of the correctional systems of 16 states
(Death Penalty Information Center, 2012). Even in states that have capital punishment, it is
used rarely and is usually reserved for only the most heinous crimes. Indeed, the American
justice system has gone to great lengths to reduce the range of punishments potentially
inf licted by the state.
Second, we have also uncoupled the punishment of offenders from the whims of politicians,
political parties, and the state. Today, the criminal sentence is imposed by an independent
judiciary. The criminal sentences imposed by judges are also bound by law. These laws place
upper limits on the criminal sentences that may be imposed. A judge cannot, for example,
sentence a thief to have a hand cut off, nor can a judge incarcerate for 10 years a person
convicted of a misdemeanor. Moreover, unlike the situation in decades past, a powerful
politician, governor, or business leader cannot overtly inf luence the sentence imposed by
a judge. Today, we strive not only to make the punishment of criminals rational, just, and
proportionate to the offense but also to make the process of criminal punishment socially
legitimate.
While we have moved away from torture and cruel and unusual punishment, we have moved
toward greater reliance on incarceration and the use of community-based sanctions. This kind
of treatment of offenders is relatively new. It represents progressive thought that seeks to balance the need for public safety against the competing interests that come with living in a
representative democracy that cherishes individual rights. Moreover, as we will see later in the
chapter, legitimate concerns for public safety have recently conflicted with fiscal constraints
associated with limited state budgets. The rhetoric of “getting tough on crime” that dominated
the 1990s has receded and has been replaced by the rhetoric of “getting smart on crime.” The
movement away from the “get tough” philosophy has occurred for at least three reasons: First,
crime rates have declined to historic lows, reducing the public pressure on politicians to do
something about crime (Justice Expenditure and Employment in the United States, 2006).
Second, the recession that started in 2008 substantially reduced tax revenues available to
states, which in turn led many states to close prisons and to seek other means to reduce correctional populations. Third, perhaps because of declining crime rates and reduced state correctional expenditures, more policy-makers are paying attention to the evidence on effective
correctional programming. Rehabilitation is, once again, making a comeback.
As we progress through this chapter, keep in mind that the American correctional system
developed within a broad political context—that is, a context where views on criminals and
their treatment changed as the political winds changed. Moreover, while many of the principles
that fostered changes in corrections practices and goals were admirable, their implementation
was often not ideal. The story of American corrections is one that includes promises of grand
reform, of appeals to the “better angels of our nature” (Pinker, 2011), and one that includes
innumerable examples of where those promises fell short and where our “better angels” did
not prevail.
The Evolution and Development of Corrections
Chapter 8
8.2 The Evolution and Development of Corrections
The road leading to the development of modern corrections, with its focus on proportionate
punishment restricted by law, has been filled with problems, missteps, and tragedy. While torture and execution gave way to the construction of institutions, institutions sometimes became
places of unspeakable suffering. Rehabilitation programs, often advocated by well-intentioned
people, sometimes became mechanisms for state oppression. And the “get tough” movement
of the 1990s sponsored unprecedented expansion of the “prison industrial complex” (Herzing,
2005). In the field of corrections there is one adage that rings true: “The road to Hell is paved
with good intentions.” Unfortunately the development of the American system of corrections
sometimes represents both our best intentions and our worst.
Recall that the punishment of criminals in England included everything from the use of fines
to branding, hanging, and other more barbaric forms of torture and execution. These forms of
punishment were rooted in the history of the Dark Ages, when governments were weak, regularly overthrown, and not always bound by the rule of law. Out of that era, however, came the
Age of Enlightenment, a period in European history marked by the rise of science, the rapid
distribution of printed materials, and an emphasis on human reasoning. Enlightenment thinkers and philosophers challenged prevailing orthodoxies that gave kings the divine right to rule,
gave the church unfettered power, and kept people ignorant and illiterate. These intellectuals
produced texts, essays, and scores of books challenging the conventional wisdom of the times.
Their writings would serve to provide the intellectual ideas for the reform of justice systems
throughout Europe. Even today, their ideas form the core of Western beliefs about justice and
punishment.
In short order, Enlightenment thinkers took aim at the criminal law and its brutal system of
punishment. They advanced ideas that directly confronted the power of both church and state.
What they shared, however, was a belief that justice could best be achieved not by repressing
individual rights but by restricting the power of government to inflict harm. A focus on individual rights, religious tolerance, science, and human reasoning prevailed among Enlightenment
thinkers.
• Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679): Hobbes advocated for the rights of the individual over
the state and developed the idea of the “social contract”—that is, the idea that individuals agree to abide by rules that protect themselves and others from violence.
Hobbes believed in the equality of all men and advocated for government based on
the consent of the people. His work established the intellectual foundation for liberal
democracy.
• John Locke (1632–1704): Another social contract theorist, Locke argued that all men
were created equal and had the same rights to pursue their individual interests. The
power of government, moreover, had to be limited to protect the rights of individuals.
• Montesquieu (1689–1755): Montesquieu wrote extensively about the despotic nature of
the criminal law and the problems it posed. He is credited with advancing the idea that
the powers of government should be constitutionally limited and distributed across legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Each branch would have its powers defined by
law and would be bound by the rule of law. Montesquieu’s ideas were used to create the
structure (three branches) of the government of the United States.
The Evolution and Development of Corrections
Chapter 8
• François-Marie Arouet (Voltaire) (1694–1778): A prolific author, Voltaire shed light on
the problems associated with torture. He campaigned vigorously against political and
religious persecution.
• Cesare Beccaria (1738–1794): Known as the founder of the Classical School, Beccaria
is credited with bringing a utilitarian perspective to crime and justice. His An Essay on
Crimes and Punishment remains one of the most influential philosophical treatments on
the purpose of punishment ever written. His work is so important that a more detailed
account of it is provided in Text Box 8.1.
• Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832): Bentham was a utilitarian thinker who advocated individual rights, freedom of expression, equal rights for women, the decriminalization of
homosexuality, and the abolition of the death penalty. He argued that the punishments
for crime should be just enough to offset whatever was gained from crime. His ideas
on the hedonistic calculus—that people pursue behaviors that bring maximum pleasure and avoid behaviors that bring pain—would influence criminal law reforms for
centuries.
• John Howard (1726–1790): Sheriff of Bedfordshire, England, Howard traveled across
England and Europe documenting the deplorable conditions inmates experienced in
hulks (prison ships), gaols (jails), and prisons. His push for a range of reforms led to the
Penitentiary Act of 1779. This created a new institution for the reform of convicts—the
penitentiary. The act also stated that the institution would be founded on four principles: it would be secure and sanitary; it would be inspected to make sure the inmates
were following institutional rules; it would ban fees for food; and it would create an
institutional regime.
Colonial America
Until the War of Independence (1775–1783), colonists in the Americas were still subject to
English law and tradition. They were also deeply influenced by Enlightenment thinkers and
their focus on individual liberty, restricted and distributed government power, and equality. Yet most colonies still relied on
public whippings, brandings, and execution as forms of punishment. Jails existed, but they were typically small and, like their
European counterparts, held individuals waiting to be punished.
▲ Quaker leader William Penn during
the Enlightenment era. © Universal Images
Group /SuperStock
Most colonists were also deeply religious, although this varied by colony. Indeed, many of the original colonies had
state-sponsored religions and laws that dictated religious
observance. Religion inf luenced the punishment of criminals,
but in some states its leaders began advocating many of the
same ideals advanced by Enlightenment thinkers. This was
particularly true of Quakerism and its focus on nonviolence
and humanitarianism. The founder of Pennsylvania, William
Penn (1644–1718), the leader of the Quakers, was instrumental
in codifying a series of laws that became known as the Great
Law of 1682.
The Great Law was actually a collection of laws that flowed from
Quaker beliefs. These laws abolished all religion-based crimes,
The Evolution and Development of Corrections
Chapter 8
IN DEPTH:
Cesare Beccaria and the Classical School
F
ew scholars have had as much impact on criminal justice as Beccaria. He advanced several
ideas that have been instrumental in the development of corrections.
Beccaria advocated utilitarianism, or the idea that the greatest pleasure or happiness for
the greatest number is a goal of government and society. Since crime reduced the pleasure or
happiness for members of society, it had to be considered an insult to society and not just to
the actual victim.
• This idea laid the intellectual groundwork justifying state intervention in criminal matters and in viewing the state as both the injured party and the only party responsible for
addressing the crime.
The criminal law, according to Beccaria, can provide for punishment, but the prevention of
crime is far more important. To prevent crime, individuals had to be able to understand the
law, so laws had to be published for all to see.
• This idea eventually made it commonplace for laws to be published and distributed for all
to read. It also provided the justification to promote the education of citizens.
Accordingly, the overall purpose of punishment was to deter people from committing crime.
Revenge, according to Beccaria, had no place in law or the administration of justice. To deter
individuals from crime, punishment had to be swift, certain, and just severe enough to offset
any gain from crime. Moreover, punishment had to be tied closely to the actual harm of the
crime.
• This idea led to deterrence theory and the idea of proportionality in punishment; it also
extended the purpose of punishment to serve other goals.
Beccaria also argued that capital punishment should be abandoned and replaced with life
imprisonment and that imprisonment should replace other cruel punishments.
• Clearly Beccaria’s arguments remain with us and are still cited by those who wish to ban
capital punishment.
Yet Beccaria’s contributions did not stop there. He also advocated that:
• Individuals should have a public trial by a jury of peers
• Individuals should not have to provide testimony implicating themselves
• Individuals accused of crimes should be assumed innocent until proven guilty
• Individuals should have legal representation and to be able to cross-examine witnesses
Do any of these arguments sound familiar? They should. They are written into the Constitution
of the United States.
restricted capital punishment only to premeditated murder, and used, for the first time, imprisonment as punishment. The length of confinement in a “house of correction” was calibrated
by the seriousness of the offense—an Enlightenment idea. Also owing to Quaker beliefs, those
sentenced to a house of correction would be required to do hard labor and in some instances
also to pay a fine.
The Evolution and Development of Corrections
Chapter 8
The Great Law was changed over time and became somewhat more punitive, allowing longer
periods of imprisonment and even including branding for some crimes. Even so, the Great Law
stood in stark contrast to the harsh and sometimes brutal English and colonial laws of other
states. However, in 1718, the Great Law was replaced by English law. Nonetheless the seeds had
been planted, and reformers would eventually draw on the Quaker experiment to reform punishment in the newly independent United States. While the Great Law may have been replaced,
the Quakers left an indelible and new component of criminal punishment and reform—the
penitentiary.
The Rise of the Penitentiary
Even though the Great Law had been replaced, Quakers remained concerned with the treatment
of criminal offenders. In 1790, the Pennsylvania legislature authorized and funded the construction of two penitentiaries to house convicted felons. The first was in Philadelphia and was
actually a revision to a preexisting jail—the Walnut
Street Jail. It had three floors with eight cells per
floor. What is important about the Walnut Street Jail
is not the size of the cells but the theory behind the
use of punishment. Quakers believed that for offenders to reform, they had to engage in penitence—that
is, to understand their crimes and to seek forgiveness.
To accomplish this, they had to be placed in solitary
confinement so that they would not be tempted by
others. Inmates remained in their cells and could not
see the outside world, could not hear the voices of
others, and were not allowed to communicate. They
▲ The Eastern Penitentiary, opened in 1829.
were given work to do in their cells and received reli© ClassicStock.com /SuperStock
gious instruction.
Although the treatment of offenders at the Walnut Street Jail may seem archaic to us today, it
is important to remember that this was the first time in history that incarceration was used as
punishment. Quaker reformers, such as Benjamin Rush and Benjamin Franklin, pushed the
use of this form of punishment as a better, more pragmatic, and more merciful alternative to
the harsh and brutal punishments used historically. In due course, the system of discipline that
emerged from the Walnut Street Jail became known as the Pennsylvania System, which relied
on total isolation, strict silence, penance, and labor.
Eventually reformers noticed that the strict isolation imposed on offenders sometimes caused
serious psychological problems. Because of this, reformers advocated for a new style of penitentiary to be built. In 1829, this new penitentiary opened and admitted its first inmate. Eastern
Penitentiary was massive. Individual cells were substantially larger than those of the Walnut
Street Jail and included everything an inmate would need (e.g., a bed, toilet, eating utensils). A
small window in the ceiling provided light and was the inmate’s only connection to the outside
world. Otherwise the “separate” system that characterized the Pennsylvania System remained
intact. Inmates remained in solitary confinement, had to endure strict silence, and had to work.
As you can imagine, the Pennsylvania system was difficult to institute and manage. In just
a few years after its opening, investigators found that physical punishment was widespread,
The Evolution and Development of Corrections
Chapter 8
silence was not always practiced, and the isolation was driving
some inmates insane. Problems with the solitary system found
in the Eastern Penitentiary gave rise to new architectural and
administrative designs. A leading alternative to the Eastern
Penitentiary was found in Auburn, New York. The New York
State Prison opened in 1819 and was built from the ground
up with a very different idea of what it would take to reform
offenders. The cells in the penitentiary were considerably
smaller than those used in Eastern because planners wanted
to abandon the reliance on solitary confinement. Inmates now
only needed enough room to sleep in their cells.
The administrative difference became known as the Auburn
System. This system of discipline was also called the “congregate” system because it allowed inmates to congregate in
large areas to work and to eat. Inmates, for example, would
sit face-to-back while eating. Silence, moreover, was enforced
through physical punishment and inmates were forced to
walk in lockstep from one place to another. Inmates were also
forced to wear prison clothing, which included the familiar
“prisoner stripes.” The congregate system also spurred the
first inmate labor system, where inmate labor was sold to private companies. Prison industry came into being at Auburn,
where prisoners produced a range of items to be sold by private companies.
▲ The Eastern Penitentiary opened in
1829. © Millennium Images /SuperStock
Prison Reformatories
Penitentiaries spread across the United States and Europe, representing a new, more humane
way to punish criminals. Still, there were more reforms. Two reforms of note were developed in
Australia and Ireland. In Australia, Captain Alexander Maconochie, the warden of the British
penal colony on Norfolk Island, created a mark system whereby offenders could earn “marks”
for good behavior and for their labors. These marks could then be used to reduce the length
of the term of incarceration. By creating this system, Maconochie introduced the idea of an
indeterminate sentence. Until Maconochie, all sentences were for a set period of time. With
an indeterminate sentence, however, offenders had a stake in demonstrating good behavior
because it could l …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
How it works
- Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
- Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions
- Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
- Download the paper after the writer uploads it
Will the writer plagiarize my essay?
You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.
Is this service safe?
All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades