Please respond to the following TWO discussion responses with 200 words EACH, at least 1 reference EACH and a 1 biblical viewpoint EACH.
This is the original post, You Do Not Have To Respond to this original Post. This is here to show you what we have been talking bout:
After reading Chapter 6 of the Mosher textbook, discuss how the process of measuring recidivism can impact the evaluation effectiveness of corrections policies.
After reading the article “The Revolving Door at the Prison Gate” by Padfield and Maruna, discuss any areas of research bias and any observed areas of less substantive research. Where did you find these elements. What were they?
1) Emanuel Dobbs- The primary textbook sustains that deterrence theory is supposed to effectively apply punishment, which in turn will reduce recidivism or repeated offending. From this theory, Sherman and Berk deduced a specific that arrest for spouse abuse would reduce the risk of repeat offenses. In this hypothesis, the arrest is the independent variable and variation in the risk of repeat offenses is the dependent variable (it is hypothesized to depend on arrest) (Bachman, 2008). However, after reading Chapter 6 of the Mosher textbook (Mosher, 2011), the concept of recidivism can mean different things to different people. That will cause problems when it applies to those who are in charge and making corrections to policies. Reconviction and reincarceration is used to measure recidivism, and there needs to be a dictation between felony and misdemeanor offenses (Mosher, 2011). Therefore, policies categorize crime to apply specifically to the offense. A misdemeanor would be as severe are committing murder stealing from a store wouldnt have the same consequences as selling illegal drugs to minors etc.
In the article “The Revolving Door at the Prison Gate” by Padfield and Maruna, there were significant research bias areas that were also less substantive to the research provided. Recidivism is a concept that can be interpreted differently by the population as we probably see today with the whole defund the police movement, which in hurt will only have a negative effect by cutting budgets and letting the people do the policing in their communities. In some people’s eyes, a violation holds a different weight to their morals customs and cultural beliefs, while some might miss the offense altogether. According to Mosher, service-oriented officers may tend to disregard minor violations to keep from sending an offender back to prison. In contrast, officers oriented in law enforcement would send those offenders back to prison (Mosher, 2011). Therefore, when an officer disregards a minor violation, they have to be careful not to impose self-bias in their operations. However, if recidivism is if measured and applied appropriately, it benefits the data to be used effectively to correct a policy. According to Mosher (2010), if it is not accurate, the corrections to the policies suffer negative consequences, affecting the community.
There is a predisposition in recidivism that will often meet a criminal to re-offend if not used or measured correctly due to ineffective policies in place. According to the The Revolving Door at the Prison Gate article, the research neglects the issue, even though they have been recalled and rising steadily in the past decade. According to Padfield and Mauna, there is a bias and misunderstanding when it comes to the topic because there is no research to support the importance of the topic (Padfield, 2006).
From a biblical worldview, the scripture denotes in Proverbs 28:5 that Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek the Lord understand it completely (Biblica, 2011). In the case of recidivism, its human nature that if you are born in a medium that encourages criminal behavior or if you experience trauma as a child, you are more likely to repeat your behaviors. To the same effect, I cant determine if, in a clinical or just unconscious behavioral disposition, those who do evil cannot differentiate or are enveloped in a medium of sin. Without intervention or some form of punishment through rehabilitation, its impossible to bring them back into society’s realities. However, those born in the lord and practice peace and love in the world will never wander into those negative predicaments or misinterpret reality and cause harm to those around them.
Bachman, R., & Schutt, R. K. (2008). Fundamentals of research in criminology and criminal justice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Biblica, (2021). The holy bible. NIV. colorado springs, CO. Retrieved February 4, 2021, from https://www.biblehub.com/niv/
Mosher, C. J., Miethe, T. D., & Hart, T. C. (2011). The mismeasure of crime. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications.
Padfield, Nicola & Maruna, Shadd (2006). The revolving door at the prison gate: Exploring the dramatic increase in recalls to prison. https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/doi/pdf/10.1177/1748895806065534.
2) Lisa Nav -Problems with measuring recidivism include what is being measured and for how long. Study to study vary in the measurement of variables. Some measure probation, parole, rearrest, reconviction, and reincarceration or some combination thereof. They also measure time periods covering months to years after initial release. Because of such variation in recidivism measurements, it is difficult to get an accurate read on recidivism.
I found the authors used very persuasive language and some sweeping statements not backed by research such as parole officers typically have the power to remand an individual to prison almost immediately on suspicion of a rule violation. The article used some quantitative data on the rise in the number of offenders in the U.K.. The case briefs of the three offenders is not enough data to make statements that the system is unfair and discriminatory. These cases do not seem to be unfair. The persons clearly violated the terms of their release, however small the infraction was. The hard lined rules of return to prison for infractions should be modified to allow more case-by-case interventions at the probation/parole level. In the current rules, the person is returned to prison and then must go through the set of appeals which are often denied. In the UK, the House of Lords must be called upon to make decisions. This seems costly and ineffective.
The Norway model of prison reform has had much success and is now being replicated. The goal is for the offender to gain the life skills they were lacking at time of incarceration so they can become a good neighbor upon release. States such as Oregon and North Dakota have studied and implemented policies like these. In 2017, North Dakota signed into legislature prison reforms that are based on the Norway model. This bill specifically addressed ways to lower the number of offenders in the states system and reduced mandatory sentencing minimums. The state saw a 6.5% drop in the prison population the following year (Janzer, 2019).
While the authors of the article seem to be good hearted, they should have used additional research to back up their points of view. As practitioners, it is important for us to wise and discerning. Hebrews 4:12 tells us For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. Social issues must be backed up by plenty of research before they can be taken seriously and affect issues of public policy. Otherwise, we will have systems designed on the opinions of a few, which would also be unjust.
Cinnamon Janzer. (2019, February 22). North Dakota Reforms its Prisons, Norwegian Style. US News & World Report; U.S. News & World Report. https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2…