Criminal Justice Philosophies Of Corrections

Criminal Justice: Philosophies of Corrections


This papers discusses the importance from the Religious, Psychological Health, and Academic programs inside the presidio paradigm (in the particular US), assessed via the lenses from the Deterrence, Incapacitation, Punishment/Retribution, Restorative Justice, plus Rehabilitation philosophies associated with corrections. It furthermore provides some discursive insights into exactly what makes up about the primary obstacles when it comes to these types of programs’ successful execution.


With regard to the implementation from the Religious, Mental Wellness, and Educational plans inside the penology subdomain from the US Division of Justice to be effective, those in cost of the procedure need to have an obvious view of exactly what makes up about the home owners associated objectives. Inside this respect, it is going to prove rather essential for the worried individuals to be capable to access these types of programs through the particular conceptual lenses associated with the Deterrence (1), Incapacitation (2), Punishment/Retribution (3), Restorative Proper rights (4), and Rehab (5) philosophies associated with corrections. This papers is meant in order to exemplify how this might be done in exercise. The paper may also discuss exactly what can be considered the main concerns inside the context associated with how the penology paradigm in america proceeds to undergo the qualitative transformation.

Correctional Schooling Programs

The main objective of correctional schooling programs would be to offer inmates with however additional incentive in order to refrain from getting involved in legal activities in the particular aftermath of getting offered time in prison. This particular goal is reflective associated with the fact that will, as numerous sociological research indicate, the increased is the degree of a particular prisoner’s educational attainment, the particular more unlikely it might be for her or him to consider performing anything illegal, as soon as a free individual.

The particular Correctional Education Organization (CEA) sets the particular all-national standards with regard to the design plus sub-sequential implementation associated with correctional education applications. CEA is inside the position in order to enforce its professional decisions with regard to these applications on the state and federal levels.

  • The particular implementation of correctional education programs will certainly prove detrimental in order to the rationale associated with subjecting convicts in order to criminal punishments, because such, which is intended to serve the objective of discouraging people through becoming affiliated along with crime (Verboon & van Dijke, 2012).
  • Offering convicts with the particular opportunity to increase their educational level will simply make sense with regard to as long because will not result inside causing the worried individuals to become more entitled to leitspruch than the sleep.
  • Teaching convicted criminals is quite inappropriate because this type of practice is obviously inconsistent with the particular idea of Retributive proper rights, which presupposes that will the main objective of keeping convicts incarcerated is in order to get them to suffer (Wenzel, Okimoto, Feather & Platow, 2008).
  • The Restorative outlook on the particular significance of correctional education is usually encouraging of the concept. The reason with regard to this is that there is assumed a good correlation between the particular level of the criminal’s educational attainment and his or even her ability in order to serve the community, because deemed appropriate simply by the court associated with law.
  • The Rehabilitative design of corrections is among the most supportive of the particular concept that prisoners ought to be taught various trades (Palermo, 2011). In its change, this has in order to do with the particular well-established fact that the better educated the particular inmate happens to be, the more likely will it be for him or her to be able to reintegrate into the community after being launched.
  • Religious Programs

    The ownership of religious programs inside the country’s penology domain is carried out to adhere to the legal provisions associated with the First Modification to the US ALL Constitution, the Religious Freedom Restoration Take action of (RFRA), plus the Religious Property Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), which entitle convicts to the right to enjoy the unrestricted freedom of religious expression while ‘doing time. ’

    The American Correctional Association (ACA) is in cost of exercising general control over the enactment of religious programs in jails. As practice shows, the main challenge inside this respect would be to strike a constant balance making it possible for inmates to consider full benefit of such their own right, on the one hand, plus eliminating the possible preconditions for people people to be wanting to abuse it, on the other.

  • The incorporation of religious programs within the penology paradigm may be circumstantially appropriate – particularly when the cases associated with administering the dying penalty are concerned.
  • Prisoners indeed have the right to practice their religious values and to become provided with religious counseling. However, taking sentenced convicts in this respect cannot be accomplished on the expense regarding burdening the jail’s budget too a great deal (Brodeur, 2007).
  • The training of making that possible for criminals to go to the faith based services of their particular choice is carefully appropriate. However, having to worry with the monotheistic conceptualization of rights, the Retributive type of corrections presupposes that the Dean jerrod, Muslim, and Hebrew inmates will end up being privileged above other folks on this factor (Strelan, Lower & McKee, 2011).
  • Typically the advocates of typically the Restorative philosophy regarding correctional justice conduct not have a great deal to state on typically the subject matter. A primary reason for this is usually that this beliefs implies that faith plays a somewhat marginal role within just the correctional approach (Rodogno, 2008).
  • In lighting of what company accounts for the Healing model’s main évidence, the integration of spiritual programs in typically the correctional process may possibly only have a very slight effect on improving the measure regarding this process’s performance.
  • Mental Health Plans

    Typically the enactment of these kinds of programs is predicted to increase typically the quality and broaden the scope regarding medical care services supplied to inmates. Between the organizations inside charge of building and implementing emotional health programs found in jails can end up being named the Us Correctional Association (ACA), American Medical Relationship (AMA), American Open public Health Association (APHA), and American Psychological Association (APA).

    There is usually still much uncertainness in regards to what can get deemed the very best method for incorporating psychological health programs directly into America’s correctional paradigm. As of these days, prison staff is usually expected to label the Diagnostic in addition to Statistical Manual regarding Mental Disorders with regards to identifying and categorizing mental abnormalities found in inmates.

  • Any time assessed within the particular conceptual framework regarding the Deterrence beliefs of corrections, shelling out money on the particular institutionalization of psychological health services found in jails will seem, making almost no perception. The reason regarding this is certainly that this specific philosophy will not promote the application regarding the person-centered correctional treatments (Tittle, Botchkovar & Antonaccio, 2011).
  • The particular Incapacitation theory regarding corrections does promote the concept of subjecting criminals to mental examination. Nevertheless , it holders in opposition to the Constructivist concept that many kinds of anti-social psychological deviance in inmates should be decriminalized.
  • Based on the Retributive outlook about criminal punishment, convicts must ‘do period, ’ regardless regarding what was once the particular social/psychological circumstances regarding relevance at that time any time they were trapped committing an offense. This largely discredits the concept it is usually necessary requiring found guilty criminals to undertake mental checkups (Sims, 2009).
  • The Restorative type supports the the use of mental well being policies within the correctional treatment, so long as this specific does not end result in the influenced prisoners less socially liable (Dzur, 2003).
  • Typically the adherents with the Healing philosophy are firmly in favor involving applying a correctional effort into guaranteeing the mental adequacy of inmates, while the important precondition for them to be able to manage to become typically the society’s productive associates eventually.
  • Debate

    Though policymakers in the PEOPLE have become in typically the position to experience a much better understanding of precisely how different correctional tactics should be merged because of their practical application to result throughout reducing the criminal offenses rate in the united states, typically the country’s already global largest population involving prisoners continue to be raise rather rapidly. Throughout its turn, this is explained by typically the inconsistency between typically the growing demand for typically the Rehabilitative philosophy involving corrections, on the other hand, and even the fact of which the practical rendering of countless of this kind of philosophy’s provisions generally proves utterly unfeasible, on the various other. All things considered, the quite term ‘corrections’ implies the possibility involving rehabilitation for typically the ‘corrected’ convicts (Carlson, 2014). As well, even so, the penal technique in the US ALL continually become more and more corporatized – typically the process which will result throughout promoting the goal of those which assume that the death of criminals is certainly the main performance of criminal treatment (Jurik, 2004). This, of course, leaves only a few doubts that the issue does require much attention, on the part of the high-ranking politicians/governmental officials in this country.

    Custody & Care Programs

    The earlier mentioned programs belong to the category of Custody & Care programs, the implementation of which is expected to increase the efficiency of the country’s correctional system, in the sense of ensuring that upon being released from the jail, a former inmate would be truly ‘corrected. ’ This again exposes the unmistakably Rehabilitative philosophy behind the formulation of such a penal objective. In this respect, the assumption is that the stronger could be the person’s ties to the community, the less likely it would be for him or her to course, that this implies that the introduction of Custody & Care programs as an integral part of the Justice Department’s functioning was predetermined by the factor of ‘public interest’ exerting an ever-greater influence on the policy-making process in the domain of penology.

    Since it is specifically the government, which is supposed to act on behalf of ‘public interest, ’ this naturally presupposes that these programs should be governmentally funded. The objective reality, however, points out to something entirely opposite – as time goes on, Custody & Care programs are being increasingly used by the private contractors to generate profits. As McShane (2012) noted, “Virtually nonexistent thirty years ago, they (Custody & Care programs) are now commonplace components of the criminal justice system. Almost all are private, and many are run for profit, deriving both their clients and their income from contracts with local government” (p. 139). As a result, the rehabilitation-related societal objectives of the earlier mentioned programs continue to remain essentially declarative.

    It is understood, of course, that such a situation can hardly be deemed tolerable. One of the possible ways to address the situation is to impose stricter governmental control over the functioning of the country’s Justice System.

    Role of Correctional Facilities

    As of today, the role of correctional facilities in the US is concerned with serving the utilitarian purpose of isolating criminals from society, as opposed to helping the latter on their way of trying to reintegrate back into it. This suggests that it is namely the principles of Retributive and Incapacitation justice that continue to define the qualitative aspects of the country’s currently enacted penology paradigm. Partially, this can be explained by the fact that even though the government continued to endorse the policy of multiculturalism for a few decades now, the public discourse in America remains explicitly Eurocentric. Therefore, it will only be logical to assume that the provisions of the Restorative and Rehabilitative concepts of criminal punishment should be referred to as such that represent mainly the theoretical rather than any practical value. This simply could not be otherwise – as practice shows, many America’s jails now function as the ‘hardening joints’ for convicts, rather than the places where these people are provided with the opportunity to learn how to act as the society’s productive members.


    In light of what has been said earlier, it should prove thoroughly appropriate to conclude this paper by confirming the existence of a wide gap between theory and practice in the country’s penological domain – something that contributes rather substantially towards undermining the legitimacy of the Constructivist (Restorative/Rehabilitative) outlook on the origins of crime and the purpose of punishment. In its turn, this adds to the intensification of social tensions in the US. Therefore, it will only be logical to suggest that the time has come for the government to begin paying more attention to the issue in question.


    Brodeur, J. (2007). Comparative penology in perspective. Crime and Justice, 36 (1), 49-91.

    Carlson, P. (2014). Prison and jail administration: Practice and theory . Burlington: Jones & Bartlett.

    Dzur, A. (2003). Civic implications of restorative justice theory: Citizen participation and criminal justice policy. Policy Sciences, 36 (3), 279-306.

    Jurik, N. (2004). Imagining justice: Challenging the privatization of public life. Social Problems, 51 (1), 1-15.

    McShane, M. (2012). The philosophy and practice of corrections . London: Routledge.

    Palermo, G. (2011). Jail and prison overcrowding and rehabilitative justice programs. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 55 (6), 843-845.

    Rodogno, R. (2008). Shame and guilt in restorative justice. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 14 (2), 142-176.

    Sims, G. (2009). The criminalization of mental illness: How theoretical failures create real problems in the criminal justice system. Vanderbilt Law Review, 62 (3), 1053-1083.

    Strelan, P., Feather, N., & McKee, I. (2011). Retributive and inclusive justice goals and forgiveness: The influence of motivational values. Social Justice Research, 24 (2), 126-142.

    Tittle, C., Botchkovar, E., & Antonaccio, O. (2011). Criminal contemplation, national context, and deterrence. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 27 (2), 225-249.

    Verboon, P., & van Dijke, M. (2012). Effect of perceived deterrence on compliance with authorities: The moderating influence of procedural justice. International Journal of Criminology and Sociology, 1 (2), 151-161.

    Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T., Feather, N., & Platow, M. J. (2008). Retributive and restorative justice. Law and Human Be

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published.