This Week’s Readings: The two (2) readings this week include: • An article by Robert Martinson (1974) on rehabilitation. • An article by Norval Morris and Michael Tonry (1990) on intermediate sanctions. Rehabilitation by Robert Martinson • Martinson (1974) summarizes a review of 231 studies on rehabilitation that occurred from 1945 to 1967. • He looks at the following to determine the effects on recidivism: educational and vocational training, individual and group counseling, milieu therapy (i.e., everything related to treatment - no distinction between guards and treatment staff), medical treatment, psychotherapy, and Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP). • A very influential study that still impacts views today toward corrections. Rehabilitation by Robert Martinson • Martinson (1974) found that evidence was lacking for successful rehabilitation (i.e., in terms of recidivism). • He states “With few and isolated exceptions, the rehabilitative efforts that have been reported so far have had no appreciable effect on recidivism” (p. 399). • The findings from this study had a great impact towards re-shifting the CJS focus on rehabilitation. Rehabilitation by Robert Martinson Many methodological problems involving issues with the following: • • • • Control groups. Lack of follow-up time. Small numbers. Treatment versus policy effects (i.e., where the experimenter not experimented alters behavior in favor of finding a positive effect). Rehabilitation by Robert Martinson Possible reasons for the findings include: • Some programs do work, but the research was not able to uncover the e ffe ct. The implication is that we need better (i.e., more sound and rigorous) research. This is very true in the 1940s, 50s, and 60s, and some may say even today. • The treatment programs were not good enough (e.g., the education given to inmates is poor, the therapy applied is not skilled enough, or given long enough, or targeted for the wrong offenders). The implication is that we need more appropriately tailored programs. • The rehabilitation model has never been fully attempted or implemented (i.e., no more than 10 percent of correctional budgets - although most organizations face this issue). Rehabilitation by Robert Martinson • Martinson (1974) provides an argument that rehabilitation treats crime as a disease that can be cured, but that crime may be more societal in nature. • If it is the latter (i.e., societal) then stop the rehabilitation notion and use prison solely as a housing facility and move to a selective incapacitation model based on risk for recidivism. • The problem is that rehabilitation is compromised. For example, a murdering spouse that catches her partner cheating may be much less of a risk for future recidivism than the 18 year old robber. Are we to sentence the former to probation and the latter to prison? Rehabilitation by Robert Martinson • Interesting to note, please see that the title of the Martinson chapter, it is: • “What Works” as opposed to the widely reported phrase of “Nothing Works.” • This is very interesting dynamic and play on words over the years. Rehabilitation by Robert Martinson Here is a fascinatingly insightful newspaper article that appeared in the Washington Post back in the late 1980s where the author highlights many of the issues surrounding Martinson: • http://www.prisonpolicy.org/scans/rehab.html Rehabilitation by Robert Martinson Please view the following video (13 minutes) of Ed Latessa, a national leader in studying correctional policy and rehabilitation: • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yul85E_LGzU&feature=youtu.be Prison and Probation by Morris & Tonry • Morris and Tonry (1990) advocate for the increased use of intermediate sanctions (IS). • They argue that of the one plus million people in prison some 10 to 15 percent would be better served if on IS. • Note: The present number of people in prison or jail is now over two million, with another five million on probation or parole. Prison and Probation by Morris & Tonry They believe that someone should only be incarcerated if one, or more than one, of the following is present: • Any lesser punishment would depreciate the seriousness of the crime or crimes committed (i.e., to affirm the gravity of the crime). • Imprisonment is necessary for deterrence, general or specific (i.e., to deter the offender and others who are like-minded). • Other less restrictive sanctions have been frequently or recently applied to this offender because other sanctions proved insufficient. Prison and Probation by Morris & Tonry • They note that one reason why judges imprison offenders sometimes has nothing to do with him or her thinking any of these three are relevant, but rather the offender will not commit any crimes while imprisoned (i.e., an incapacitation reason). • They also argue that of those persons on probation many would be better served on IS because probation case loads are unmanageable and the punishment is not severe enough. Rather, a fine, house arrest, or community service may be more appropriate. Prison and Probation by Morris & Tonry • They call for a “Comprehensive Punishment System” that would use a continuum or range of punishment options (not just the dichotomous probation/ prison option). • Potential reformers must understand that IS are labor intensive and in the short run may be more expensive than prisons, but in long run may be more cost effective and “just.” • IS must be enforced and backed up (i.e. there needs to be consequences). Prison and Probation by Morris & Tonry They believe IS are better suited in a determinate sentencing structure rather than an intermediate structure. Why? • The first involves an ethical concern in the sense they believe it is wrong to extend prison time particularly in light of the fact that the system has not shown it can actually rehabilitate inmates. • The second involves a psychological concern in that forced participation to demonstrate so-called rehabilitation is in direct contrast to selfimprovement, which is bred in voluntary participation (i.e., motivate prisoners to participate not motivate them to change). • Moreover, a comprehensive sentencing system must provide guidance to judges on which IS to apply, when, and to whom. Prison and Probation by Morris & Tonry Question: What do the authors mean when they promote what they call “Principled interchangeability of punishment of like cases?” • Please go into the discussion board to comment/discuss. • See “exchange rates” discussion involving the notion that like cases should not be treated alike (see also the controversial example offered on pages 383-384.
Purchase answer to see full attachment