Prison Population Explosion The incarceration rate in the United States is alarmingly high given the advanced nature of the country overall. Indeed, prisons have become the de facto asylums of the current day. While many people in prisons should absolutely be there, there are many others that are mentally ill, drug-addicted or both. If one or both of those diagnoses were cleared up, this could serve as a vehicle to significantly drive down the amount of people in prison, the amount of recidivism and the net financial and other burdens (such as loss of life) that are thrust upon the American public. While some of the pernicious patterns have ebbed a bit, the solutions used thus far are simply not getting the job done. There needs to be a weeding out of who truly wants to get their life straightened out and who is just playing on the mercy of those that think that society or the system are to blame for crime. While it is easy to blame society, the system and other facets of American life for the rampant crime that exists, people that want help with drug or mental illness problems should get it and those that cannot or will not do so need to be otherwise controlled and housed as is needed to protect the public.

Analysis

The research question that will be posed as part of the broader research paper that will be done subsequent to this proposal will center on to what extent proper social and mental health services for prisoners those on parole/probation can be helped through programs that focus on improving mental health, ending drug addiction and otherwise counseling people on how to make the right decisions. There can also be talk of expungements and such for those that keep their nose clean after an initial or minor offense. The question becomes whether there is a net gain for society in terms of outcomes and/or taxpayer dollars spent when it comes to these programs. With that in mind, the author of this report hypothesizes that there would be a net gain in both societal health as well as taxpayer dollars spent if people were treated for their mental and drug-related afflictions rather than being warehoused for a finite amount of time and then released to the same conditions, people and patterns that got them into trouble in the first place. This all being said, the author of the above research question and hypothesis is not naive enough to believe that this suggestion alone would solve all of society's ills. Of course, nothing would do that but this is one prong of a few that would help make great strides if it was positioned properly and given the right amount of money, resources and people. Other efforts and ideas that would have to run concurrent to the one above would be proper family planning, proper handling of the homeless and eliminating the disparity that exists in the schools when it comes to things like poverty. Poverty is a huge part of all of those items as doing the wrong things in life can lead to poverty and that leads to so many other problems (Groffen et al., 2008).

As for the data and details that feed the above research question and hypothesis, the source data is beyond voluminous and it is impossible to miss. A pertinent question that has been alluded to earlier in this report but will be stated explicitly right now is striking a balance between public safety and keeping the incarceration rate at the optimal level. Indeed, there is a point where too many people are being thrown and kept and prison while letting too many of those same people loose can lead to more death and destruction. As stated by Raphael in 2014, the question then becomes how the United States can reduce its incarceration rates without endangering the public at the same time. Raphael uses the rather harsh drug sentences imposed on drug offenders in the United States as a test case for whether those sentences really do any good or if they're actually too punitive. Beyond that, there are multiple kinds of drug criminals in that there are users, dealers/traffickers or those that do a bit of both. The dilemma with drug users is that drug use, at least initially, is a choice. Similarly, choosing to admit there is a problem and getting help is a choice. So too is the choice to change patterns, not hang out around the same people or environments that led to prior drug use or relapses and so forth. Generally...

Those that do not make that choice and that harm others in any way as part of their pattern of drug use can be and should be in jail as they are a danger to others. Those who assert that drug use is a victimless crime, to put it nicely, are not detached from reality. To say that it is a moral crime if fallacious and absurd on its face (Raphael, 2014).
A similar dilemma is posed when it comes to the mental health. The one key difference is that mental health is often hereditary in nature. Other times, it is ingrained and embedded through a long pattern of abuse and dysfunction and re-writing those pathways in adult criminals can be very hard to pull off and sustain. On that same note, crime that leads to people going to jail comes in many forms. Whether it be stealing, driving drunk, violent outbursts or actions and so forth, mental illness (not to mention drug abuse) can manifest in a number of nasty ways. Mental illness has its own dilemmas including getting consent to care for the patient, getting the patient to realize that they have a problem, worrying whether the patient is being sincere when it comes to treatment, whether the patient is being truthful about what they are saying and just how much control over their actions they really have. Indeed, people use the term "blacked out" so much that it has lost its meaning and many people assume it is just a cop-out. However, depression, anxiety and mood swings are very real to the people that truly suffer through mental disease and it can influence the behavior of these same people to significant degrees. Getting people medicated and treated for mental health, however, is as much a voluntary process as getting help for drugs. There has to be an initial period where a person is made aware of where they are mentally. At that point of lucidity, the person has to make the right choice. If they make the wrong one, then jail is probably the answer (Hayes, Senior, Fay & Shaw, 2014).

As noted above, drug-addled and/or mentally ill offenders should not be allowed to run amok unfettered if they keep making the wrong choices. Many people parrot the idea of giving chance after chance under the auspices of being compassionate and merciful. However, there is a fine line between giving someone some slack and enabling them. The author of this response stands by the above assertion that the prison population and the cost to humanity could be brought significantly lower with the right amount of mental health or addiction care. However, those that take this kindness for weakness should be in jail because that is why those jails were built. There is no social or economic program that is going to eliminate street and other crime. However, the litany of psychiatrists, psychologists and other clinicians out there can absolutely make a difference when it comes to those that are unable to afford proper care and/or are not lucid enough to know just how out of bounds their behavior and mindsets are. Each person is different and thus their counseling and other interventions will be different. Just as using the prison system as a repository for the untouchables and unwelcome of society is not wise, so too is using a broad brush to address the problem when delicacy and attention to detail are paramount (McKenna et al., 2015).

Conclusion

As noted throughout this report, American society has always been rather shoddy when it comes to the handling of those with mental health and drug problems. While so much of what is involved is voluntary behavior, using a quick and dirty solution to the problem is not the right answer. Psychology, psychiatry and counseling have come so far over the years. That being said, the way in which our society addresses deviance needs to change a lot more.