Reducing Recidivism: The Case for Rehabilitation Programs

Reducing Recidivism: The Case for Rehabilitation Programs:

Reducing Recidivism: The Case for Rehabilitation P rograms Author : Freeman R. Irvine III

The Need for Research:

The Need for Research 95% of state prisoners will eventually be released into society. W ithin 3 years of a prisoner’s release, 67% of ex-offenders will be rearrested. The technical term for ex-offenders who re-offend is recidivists. Recidivism is the tendency for individuals to lapse back to criminal habits. R ecidivism is a serious problem and evidently, the criminal justice system has failed to prepare our communities from recidivists.

How can recidivism be reduced?:

How can recidivism be reduced? Some believe that punitive sentences is the most effective method. However, if 67% of ex-offenders punished by the correctional system will be rearrested within 3 years, is punitive sentences the best method? Another argument is that rehabilitation programs is the most appropriate method to reduce recidivism. Rehabilitation programs prepare offenders for successful re-entry into communities by providing them with empowerment skills and the opportunity to overcome their problems.

The Thesis of this Article:

The Thesis of t his Article The thesis of this article is that rehabilitation programs is the most effective method to reduce recidivism and that participants of a rehabilitation program are less likely to recidivate. The purpose of this article is to evaluate recidivism outcomes of numerous rehabilitation programs using the documentary analysis method in order to determine if support for the premise was found.

Theoretical Rationale:

Theoretical Rationale The article draws from the perspective of three theories: anomie, differential association, and social disorganization. These theories are used to show why rehabilitation programs are needed. Evidence from this study was presented in light of these theories.

Methodology:

Methodology The qualitative documentary analysis was used to examine the topic. Thirty-three residential and nonresidential rehabilitation programs were evaluated in this study. All of the documents in this study were published from 2006 to the present. Most of the programs examined had a treatment and control group contrast. A few studies had a program drop-out group contrast.

Findings:

Findings Of the 33 program studies evaluated, only 27 had treatment and control groups. All programs without a control group showed a reduction in recidivism. Of the 27 studies that had a treatment and control groups, 18 showed a lower recidivism rate for the treatment group than for the control group . Nine programs showed no difference in reduction of recidivism between the treatment and control groups. Overall, treatment groups had a recidivism rate of 33 %, compared to a recidivism rate of 39% for the control group and 86% for treatment program dropouts.

Discussion :

Discussion The thesis of the paper was confirmed by the fact that overall treatment groups had a lower recidivism rate than the comparison groups. The findings of this article is consistent with previous research. C utting rehabilitation programs would be detrimental to communities and would increase recidivism . Two trends were found among unsuccessful programs: participants lacked employment, and participants had a violent history. Ineffective implementation design causes rehabilitation programs to be unsuccessful.

Suggestions for Future Research :

Suggestions for Future Research P henomenological studies investigating unemployed offenders should be conducted. There needs to be more studies that examine violent offender programs and what can be done to make them more effective. More research needs to be conducted on why two similar rehabilitation programs produce dissimilar results. For instance, why might a cognitive rehabilitation program in one state reduce recidivism whereas a program in another does not?

Conclusion:

Conclusion Since support for the thesis was found, correctional institutions should embrace rehabilitation programs and increase funding for the programs. T he positive impact of rehabilitation programs is manifold. If correctional institutions implement appropriate rehabilitation programs and funding is increased for the programs, communities would be safer, and the criminal justice system would benefit economically in the end.