Assignment 1: Improvements to the Correctional System
To attain high level of professionalism in correction facilities, management should undertake training programs for the staff and enhance the relationship between staff and inmates. Training involves training the staff on how to carry out their task especially when executing or implementing various policies and laws in the correction facilities. For instance, the staff members may learn on how to deal with various situations especially when lives are in jeopardy. Training is necessary so that staffs are equipped with skills, attitude and knowledge on how to they should perform their duties while at the same time respecting the dignity and rights of inmates (Crewe, Liebling, & Hulley, 2015). Prison work is challenging and staff members’ especially new recruits required such skills and knowledge about prison environment beforehand. Enhancing staff-inmate relationship involves adopting a code of conduct that spells out prison staff should communicate and associate with inmates. A cordial relationship with boundaries will help in curbing fatalities and enhance communication process which is important in decision making (Crewe et. al 2015).
In various circumstances, the conditions in correctional facilities lead to circumvention of the Eight Amendment’s provisions on Cruel and Unusual Punishment Standard. Where the inmates are sentenced to length sentences for having committed minor crimes or violations, it can be said that the provisions of the Eighth Amendment are not adhered to (Russel, 2016). Excessive sentencing of prisoners on the basis of petty crime and confining them in the same facilities with hardcore criminals such as murders is cruel and more importantly out of context (Dolovich, 2009). Moreover, having many inmates’ line tinny cells is unusual and cruel and may distort them psychologically so that when they are released they may not fit in the society into which they are released.
Abolishment of corporal punishment in the correction systems was the right decision .Taking corporal punishment as a measure of institutional punishment amounts to violations of the basic human rights of the offenders. In history, this form of punishment involved different methods such as the use of strap, water hose, flogging and poor diet which clearly in violation of basic human rights. There have been many abuses in the past and this method used to attract inappropriate characters as correctional professionals and create a hostile environment between the inmates and the staff (Davis & Freeman, 2010). Moreover, there is no evidence to support corporal punishment as a better form of correctional method in shaping the character of inmates. Prisoners should be allowed to choose among various types of punishment or serve prison terms. Hence, conversion of offenders cannot be provided through corporal punishment and in any case it may lead to more hostile characters (Davis & Freeman, 2010).
Immediate sanctions can go a long way in deterring crime in the society. The basic rationale for intermediate sanctions is that punishment for criminals can minimize crime level through deterrence, rehabilitation, punishment and even incapacitation. The enforcement of intermediate sanctions restricts a probationer’s activities while demanding more accountability from any actions they take, while at the same time allowing an offender the freedom to freely live in the society (Apel, 2013). The method is effective where precautions are taken to so that public safety is maintained while inculcating good behavior so that the offender does not commit more crimes or offenses. Intermediate sanctions assist in restricting an offender’s movement while providing a more effective ways of supervising offenders especially in cases where there is overcrowding and officers are overworked (Apel, 2013). An example of intermediate sanction that is effective in deterrence is a curfew placed on an offender who has a record of disturbing public peace after excessive drinking at night.
Correction facilities are not well equipped to deal with offenders suffering from mental illness since they have never been designed to cater for such individuals. Such inmates suffer from various illnesses such as bipolar disorder, schizophrenia and even major depression which require medical attention. In addition, some inmates have psychiatric disorders that lead to considerable functional disabilities and most of them will need psychiatric intervention while in prisons. Unfortunately, the correctional facilities do not have the capacity to respond in the right manner to the mentally-ill offender’s needs. Mostly, the facilities are crippled by insufficient facilities, understaffing and limited financial resources for establishing enough programs to address the needs (Heekin & Polivka, 2015). This means that prisoners who are serious do not receive meaningful treatment. Even though the facilities have many conscientious professionals in mental health field working in the facilities, they encounter daunting challenges while trying to meet the patient’s needs. This is because of facilities that are physically inadequate, large caseloads, and in some cases, institutional cultures that have no sympathy for the mental health services needs. Even where these institutions are provided with more physical resources, mental health programs and staffing, the gains are eroded by increase in inmates suffering from mental illnesses which continues to make the facilities deficient in a myriad of ways (Heekin & Polivka, 2015). Overburdened staff and facilities mean that response to psychiatric emergencies is not sufficient.
References
Crewe, B., Liebling, A., & Hulley, S. (2015). Staff‐Prisoner Relationships, Staff Professionalism, and the Use of Authority in Public‐and Private‐Sector Prisons. Law & Social Inquiry, 40(2), 309-344.
Dolovich, S. (2009). Cruelty, Prison Conditions, and the Eighth Amendment. NYUL Rev., 84, 881.
Russel, K. D. (2016). Cruel and Unusual Construction: The Eight Amendment as a Limit on Building Prisons on Toxic Waste Sites. U. Pa. L. Rev., 165, 741.
Davis, A. Y., & Freeman, S. (2010). Are Prisons Obsolete?. New York: Seven Stories Press.
Apel, R. (2013). Sanctions, perceptions, and crime: Implications for criminal deterrence. Journal of quantitative criminology, 29(1), 67-101.
Heekin, K., & Polivka, L,(2015). The Criminal Justice System and Mental Health.
Retrieved from: http://coss.fsu.edu/subdomains/claudepeppercenter.fsu.edu_wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/The-Criminal-Justice-System-and-Mental-Health.pdf
