Rehabilitation or Punishment in Criminal Justice
The criminal justice system comprises several stages, from arrest to sentencing. Correctional facilities, one of the stages in criminal justice, house a wide array of convicted offenders. An increase in crime rates causes an increase in the number of those incarcerated, creating a need for reforms. Reducing recidivism is one way by which incarceration rates can be reduced through several approaches. These approaches are punishment and rehabilitation, which can be applied at varying stages within the criminal justice system. On the one hand, punishment is the most predominantly used approach in criminal justice, focusing on punitive measures from community service to sentencing. Punitive measures are set in place depending on the severity of a person’s offense. For felonies, incarceration is the sought-after punitive measure with the objective of deterrence, retribution, and prisoners’ incapacitation, among many more. Further, in any case, rehabilitation is also an objective of punitive measures implemented. On the other hand, rehabilitation focuses on altering the offender’s behavior. The major objective of rehabilitation through rehabilitative programs is to reduce recidivism, and rehabilitation programs vary between juvenile offenders and adult offenders. This variance stems from the developmental years of juveniles, where they can be molded before their adulthood. Nevertheless, whether during incarceration, parole, probation, or any other stage, rehabilitation is provided within a correctional or community-based setting, including hospitals. The application of rehabilitation or punishment in the criminal justice system raises questions on the most effective approach, and considering the offenders in the criminal justice system, the efficacy of rehabilitation over punishment presents great benefits for the offenders and society at large because rehabilitative programs ease offenders’ entry back into society, reform offenders in society thereby reducing crimes, and are also cost-effective.
Rehabilitative Programs Ease Offenders’ Reintegration
Rehabilitation through rehabilitative programs eases offenders’ entry back into society. First, rehabilitative programs ease reintegration by equipping offenders with skills and strengths that guarantee success in society (Edwards, 2021). For many offenders, especially those previously incarcerated, joining a community after imprisonment is challenging. This challenge arises from different areas in their life, including but not limited to employment and housing. These challenges act as risk factors that would lead to recidivism, especially when ex-convicts lack a means of making ends meet. Rehabilitation poses a solution to these challenges by offering them skills through rehabilitative programs, which change their life trajectories by preventing recidivism. Rehabilitative programs are diverse, addressing one risk/challenge at a time, ensuring the offenders have a specific skill to address a given challenge (Practice Profile: Rehabilitation Programs for Adult Offenders | CrimeSolutions, National Institute of Justice, 2020). For instance, for an educational challenge rooted in an individual’s educational level, a rehabilitation program focusing on education is put in place, so when the ex-offender reenters society, education levels will not be a setback that they have to face. Accordingly, an offender who might have chosen crime after reobtaining their freedom due to their education level will no longer have that thought in mind. Other skills that ease reentry into society include areas of mental health and creating upward social mobility (Edwards, 2021). Therefore, the skills obtained from rehabilitative programs ease offenders’ entry back into society by equipping them with skills that make their transition easier and not harder.
Secondly, rehabilitation identifies potential risk factors that may set back offenders’ reintegration (Yesberg & Polaschek, 2019). As aforementioned, the challenges that offenders face in their reentry into society serve as risk factors. For instance, an offender with a substance abuse disorder will revert to substance abuse during their reentry into society. Consistently, rehabilitation will address the risk of substance abuse prior to reentry to ease reentry by reducing the risk of substance use. Rehabilitation addresses these risks through treatment programs to initiate change in an individual. According to Yesberg and Polaschek (2019), the risk factors, or the potential challenges, addressed using the rehabilitative programs’ treatments reduce recidivism through the changes caused. Additionally, to yield the desired change, programs run for a specific period of time to ensure that an offender will not re-offend by maintaining the change acquired via the program. Thus, the changes caused through treatment directly address the risk factors individually, easing reentry into society by eradicating potential hindrances and reducing recidivism.
Rehabilitative Programs Reform Offenders
Further, rehabilitative programs reform offenders in society, thereby reducing crimes. Following reentry into society, ex-offenders have the looming potential of recidivism. It is a rehabilitation objective to reduce recidivism through reformation. Rehabilitative programs reform offenders based on treatment plans for various risk factors (Yesberg & Polaschek, 2019). Ex-offenders’ chances to re-offend occur from the challenges they face following their release. In the case of an ex-offender with a mental health issue that goes unaddressed, the individual will resume the erratic behavior following their reentry as the challenge continues to exist. Rehabilitation programs addressing mental health status are applied to counter this risk. The individual, now aware of the problem at hand and the steps necessary to manage and eradicate it, will not display erratic behavior that will cause re-offense. Consequently, it suffices to say that this individual is reformed, and following reentry, there is minimal chance of recidivism. Additionally, the Bible calls for reformation and change by not conforming to the ways of the world but by renewing the mind as is God’s will (New International Version, 1978/1983, Romans 12:1-2). Rehabilitative programs renew the mind through treatment programs that target the risk behaviors of offenders reforming them. For instance, offenders with addiction disorders reform following treatment programs, causing a change that does not conform but also changes their perspectives. Therefore, renewed minds yield reformed offenders.
Moreover, reformed offenders following rehabilitation show deterrence from crime through avoidance of recidivism (Butler et al., 2020). Following rehabilitative programs, treatments are offered to address each risk individually, showing that offenders become aware of themselves through the identification of challenges that may hinder their reformation. According to Butler et al. (2020), offenders’ self-perception influences criminal desistance and persistence, and following the reformation, desistance from crime is most probable. Consistently, reformation shows offenders that there is a better life trajectory for them by indicating that re-offending is not a given. Also, the rehabilitation programs make offenders aware of specific risk factors, making them contributors to their reformation. Following the reformation of ex-offenders in society, Butler et al. (2020) position that societal support should be present in recognition of rehabilitation celebrations with regard to the reformed offenders who are a part of a given society. Subsequently, the rehabilitation ceremonies show that offenders are deterred from re-offending, ensuring that society is safe from reduced recidivism.
Rehabilitative Programs Are Cost-Effective
Rehabilitative programs are cost-effective. The use of public funds in the criminal justice system varies, especially with incarceration. High incarceration rates increase the cost to society, and rehabilitation presents a solution (Bernard et al., 2020). Rehabilitation is linked to public safety and the use of public funds as a part of the criminal justice system. The cost-effectiveness of rehabilitation stems from its impacts on recidivism, incarceration rates, and imprisonment costs. Rehabilitation programs offered in diversion programs for low-level offenders prevent incarceration, saving costs that would have been incurred from imprisonment and incarceration (Bernard et al., 2020). Accordingly, the reduction in incarceration rates and imprisonment costs saves costs for the criminal justice system, which in turn saves on public funds. Initially, diversion programs saved on cost without addressing health issues, including mental health issues, but with the use of rehabilitation programs, not only is there save on cost but also reformation of offenders (Bernard et al., 2020). The rehabilitation programs used in this case are used in the community-based setting, as the offenders are not incarcerated.
Additionally, rehabilitation reduces recidivism and crime rates, thereby being cost-effective (Krūze & Priede, 2020). As aforementioned, rehabilitation results in individuals’ reformation, reducing recidivism and crime rates. The higher the incarceration rates, the higher the cost incurred. Subsequently, the reduction in crime rates reduces incarceration rates, saving on costs. Furthermore, Krūze and Priede (2020) position that rehabilitation saves on cost by transforming offenders, thereby reducing crime in the long run. Consistently, the reduction of crime rates by previous offenders reduces incarceration, saving on costs. Rehabilitation programs that equip offenders with skills varying from vocational training and education reduce prison numbers, saving on costs and making funds available for other criminal justice projects that may include the implementation of more rehabilitative programs (Krūze & Priede, 2020). Given that costs sum up individual costs, a reduction in the number of those incarcerated while simultaneously reducing the rate of recidivism ensures that the cost per individual incarcerated is reduced.
Punitive Measures
Punishment involves the use of punitive measures to yield changes in offenders. Some of the objectives of punishments are reparation, deterrence, retribution, rehabilitation, and prisoners’ incapacitation. These objectives show that the goal of punitive measures is majorly to discipline offender for their offenses. Deterrence in punitive measures functions to prevent re-offending by instilling fear of the punishment to come as a result (Maculan & Gil, 2020). Prisoners’ incapacitation prevents the chances of re-offending by removing offenders from society and confining them in incarceration facilities. Retribution ensures that offenders are not harmed by society upon their reentry, given that punitive measures were already reinforced. Reparation involves compensation of the victims previously offended by the offenders. From these descriptions, the effects and gains from punishment are apparent. It is also evident that reformation is not a significant aspect of punitive measures but rather deterrence. Also, the state of the offenders being punished is not addressed with the above objectives of punitive measures. Accordingly, these arguments question the efficiency and efficacy of punitive measures in the criminal justice system.
Opinion and Conclusion
In conclusion, rehabilitation is the preferable resort for offenders rather than punishment as the programs have more advantages, befitting the offenders, the criminal justice system, and society. Rehabilitation benefits offenders by reforming their lives. Not only will the offenders obtain skills that will aid them during reentry into society, but they will also have an upward life trajectory with their reformation. Rehabilitative programs lead to the changes that offenders need in their lives, preventing recidivism that would lead to incarceration. These changes address given aspects of an offender that would pose risks that would lead to recidivism. Addressing these aspects spreads awareness in offenders, equipping them with skills that help them cope. Rehabilitation benefits the criminal justice system by being cost-effective. This cost-effectiveness originates from the reduction in incarceration rates by offender reformation, which reduces crime rates and diversion programs, all of which serve to reduce the use of public funds in the criminal justice system. Rehabilitation benefits society by reintroducing reformed offenders and saving on the usage of public funds. The introduction of reformed offenders ensures a reduction in crime rates, promoting safety in society and saving on the funds that would have been used in the criminal justice system.
References
Bernard, C. L., Rao, I. J., Robison, K. K., & Brandeau, M. L. (2020). Health outcomes and cost-effectiveness of diversion programs for low-level drug offenders: A model-based analysis. PLOS Medicine, 17(10), e1003239. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003239
Butler, L. C., Cullen, F. T., Burton, A. L., Thielo, A. J., & Velmer S. Burton, Jr. (2020). Redemption at a correctional turning point: Public support for rehabilitation ceremonies. DigitalCommons@UNO. https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/criminaljusticefacpub/281
Edwards, K. (2021). Prisoners’ perspectives on limited rehabilitative program opportunities. The Qualitative Report. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.4495
Krūze, E., & Priede, J. (2020). Cost-effectiveness of prison system development – comparison of the European countries. European Integration Studies, 1(14), 69–79. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.eis.1.14.26384
Maculan, E., & Gil, A. G. (2020). The rationale and purposes of criminal law and punishment in transitional contexts. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 40(1), 132–157. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqz033
Practice profile: Rehabilitation programs for adult offenders | CrimeSolutions, National Institute of Justice. (2020, February 11). CrimeSolutions, National Institute of Justice. https://crimesolutions.ojp.gov/ratedpractices/101#1-0
The Holy Bible: New International Version. (1983). Hodder and Stoughton. (Original work published 1978).
Yesberg, J. A., & Polaschek, D. L. L. (2019). How does offender rehabilitation actually work? Exploring mechanisms of change in high-risk treated parolees. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 63(15–16), 2672–2692. https://doi.org/10.1177/
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
We’ll write everything from scratch
Question 
The body of the Research Paper: Final Assignment must be comprised of 4–6 pages of content. The Title Page and Reference Page are not included in the page count.
Within the body, the Introduction must include background information on the criminal justice topic, a well-written thesis, and a preview of points.
Rehabilitation or Punishment in Criminal Justice
Within the body, you must present an Argument section that thoroughly supports the assertions made in the thesis statement with the use of analysis and comprehensively developed subpoints and academic research. Each body paragraph must address one issue and directly relate it to the thesis statement. The information must clearly relate to the main topic.
Within the body, the Conclusion must summarize the main headings of the paper. The Conclusion should not contain any new research.