Crim debate week 11

Is Reducing Crime Best Achieved by Deterring Individuals or by Offering Rehabilitation? Shauntel Penney A00434367 This week's debate reflection is concerned with the most effective way in reducing crime
1 rates. The question posed was whether or not the most efficient way in reducing crime is best achieved by deterring people from engaging in criminal behaviours or by offering rehabilitation to people who have engaged in crime. I personally believe that the best route to take would be to offer rehabilitation to individuals who have committed criminal acts. Offering rehabilitation programs to people who have committed criminal acts can be a very beneficial way in reducing recidivism. Several individuals who have been incarcerated struggle with mental disorders and psychological issues that need to be properly addressed in ways that will not simply become resolved on their own, or by keeping those individuals behind bars 24/7. Rehabilitation programs can take on several different forms that can target each individual with their own unique needs to better themselves mentally and physically. Such programs can include; drug rehabilitation, alcohol rehabilitation, gamballing rehabilitation, career and educational programs, as well as mental health programs, just to name a few. These programs offer offenders a chance to learn from one's mistakes as well as providing guidance. By having proper rehabilitation programs, inmates who get released from prisons are better reintegrated into society with a better opportunity to succeed and to become law abiding citizens. Not only does rehabilitation help the offender, but it also helps society by giving them a sense of relief knowing that this particular individual is now properly equipped to be reintegrated back into the community. By rehabilitating offenders it gives them hope, positive attitudes, and skills needed to avoid crime and live a productive life. Sometimes all a person needs is somebody to believe in them and have a little faith in order for them to turn their life around for the better. My position on this debate was reinforced from this week's chapter when discussing
2 Andrews and Bonta. Andrews and Bonta's "Psychology of Criminal Conduct Theory" is based on a result from a meta-analysis. The two used the results from the meta-analysis to develop factors that contribute to crime and recidivism, emphasizing the need to address those factors when developing rehabilitation programs in correctional settings (Livingston, 2020). Their argument is that rehabilitation works and that there is an effective way to run and design rehabilitation programs in ways that are effective in reducing recidivism (Posick & Rocque, 2019). Andrews and Bonta conducted a study that highlighted how appropriate rehabilitation programs reduce recidivism by half (Posick & Rocque, 2019. These men developed the risk- need-responsivity approach which is a more focused way to think about offender rehabilitation (Posick & Rocque, 2019). This method pays particular attention to offender characteristics such as focusing on what risk factors they have, what needs must be addressed, as well as what their learning styles are (Posick & Rocque, 2019). Each offender's journey as to how they got to where they are today is very unique to each individual and I strongly agree with Andrews and Bonta's approach in focusing on offender characteristics and providing them with the best rehabilitation program for their specific needs instead of simply just trying to deter people from engaging in criminal behaviour. Reference Livingston, J. (2020). Week 11 Micro-Lecture: Criminal Justice Policy [Video]. Department of Criminology, Saint Mary's University. Halifax, Canada. Posick, C., & Rocque, M. (2019). Great debates in criminology. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Uploaded by MateDonkey3744 on