Prisons Should be focused on rehabilitation rather than punishment (for any and all cases of crime)

: the action, process, or result of rehabilitating or of being rehabilitated: such as

b : the process of restoring someone (such as a criminal) to a useful and constructive place in society

1

: the act of punishing

2

a: suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution

b: a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure

: an illegal act for which someone can be punished by the government

especially : a gross violation of law

2

: a grave offense especially against morality

3

: criminal activity

efforts to fight crime

4

: something reprehensible, foolish, or disgraceful

To begin, I am assuming that my opponent will use examplesof violent offenders and how punishment can be a means of control. Within theterm violent offenders. In the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR)Program, violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and nonnegligentmanslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault. Minor offensesconsisting of the latter half and the former being major.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), Violentcrime had the lowest recidivism rate, but prisoners also faced longer sentencesthan other types of crime. I believe that using psychologists to aid inlowering recidivism rates and overall bettering the lives of convicts andex-convicts is the best route to take.

Only two studies have specifically linked changes in dynamicrisk factors to post-treatment recidivism outcomes in violent offenders (Lewiset al., 2013; Olver, Lewis, & Wong, 2013). In both studies, the ViolenceRisk Scale (VRS; Wong & Gordon, 2006) is used to assess therapeutic changesin dynamic risk in a sample of 150 high-risk incarcerated adult male violentoffenders. Participants attended an eight-month high-intensity cognitive behavioralviolence intervention and were followed up for approximately five yearsfollowing release from prison. The results indicate that reductions in VRSdynamic risk scores are associated with significantly lower violent recidivismafter controlling for pre-treatment risk level (Lewis et al., 2013) andpsychopathy (Olver et al., 2013). Positive therapeutic changes are negativelycorrelated with psychopathy, and thus risk reduction. These findings suggestthat dynamic risk factors are changeable and that reductions in risk are associatedwith lower recidivism upon release, but that psychopathy is a potentresponsivity factor that can interfere with treatment outcomes. I propose usingthe cognitive behavioral violence intervention for non-psychotic violentinmates instead of punishing them for reacting to mental issues. 

In the terminology of the legal system, incarceration isreferred to as “punishment” (Newman, 1985), although this usage entangles twomeanings. The first meaning implies societal retribution; in essence, those whohave made others suffer are, in the interest of fairness, made to suffer aswell. The second meaning implies rehabilitation, or a lessening of odds thatthe individual will engage in future criminal behavior. It is in this usagethat legal punishment is intended to function as operant punishment, aconsequence that reduces the probability of occurrence of the behavior on whichit is contingent. The purpose of the present article was to evaluate theefficacy of legal punishment, as it is practiced in the USA, as operantpunishment. 

Given the dramatic rates of incarceration in the USA, ifincarceration actually functions as operant punishment, the rate of criminalbehavior should be relatively low, but statistics show that is not the case.Following imprisonment, individuals who have been incarcerated are oftenunsuccessful in transitioning back to public life and are likely to commitfuture crimes (i.e., recidivate). Indeed, America has an overwhelmingly highrecidivism rate. A review of data from 30 states found that 70 % of prisonersreleased in 2005 were rearrested for a new crime within 3 years, and about 75 %were rearrested for a new crime within 5 years (Durose, Cooper, & Synder,2014). For 50 % of these prisoners, re-arrest led to incarceration within 3years, and for 55 %, re-arrest led to incarceration within 5 years. Schlosser(1998) suggested that brief stays in prison followed by re-arrest creates anenvironment where criminals can learn from each other about how to engage incriminal behavior. Clearly, as typically practiced in the USA, incarcerationqualifies as a poor intervention for improving criminal behavior.