Halfway House Programs: Community Resistance and Possible

Halfway House Programs: Community Resistance and Possible Solutions Halfway houses are Community-Based Residential Facilities or Community Residential Centers. Additionally, volunteers or correctional officer's head this halfway house programs in a community-based setting. Halfway house programs provide an important role between institutional care and the community (Sechrest, 1991). This is because they offer rehabilitative and residential services to the designated community. In addition, they provide a chance for exceptional and creative programming aimed at solving the needs of the community and its residents at large.

In addition, the use of these programs is not a new idea because most of the offenders under observation, they are supervised in the community. Some of the offenders who receive community supervision include offenders under probation, those who receive a conditional sentence, and people who are gradually in the process of release into the community through a parole or a statutory release (Lindsay, 1991). It is important to note that many offenders under halfway house programs are there on day parole, some on temporary absences, full parole or statutory release.

In addition, most of the offenders chosen to serve under the programs are those who do not present a threat to the community before they complete their sentence. The National Parole Board will also refer an offender if the offender shows the capacity to contribute to the society's protection. However, a halfway house may reject an offender if it lacks enough resources and the offender-based is a probable threat to the community.

Halfway houses must conform to standards including offer quality service, show responsibility, credibility, protection of officers, efficient planning and management, and appropriate evaluation. Possible Reasons for Resistance Research suggests that the public supports rehabilitation in the community rather than when it happens in prison. However, some agencies wishing to establish halfway houses often face resistance from the community. To most of the citizens, the halfway house programs are among other government policies that suppress the freedoms/rights of the common people to the rights of special groups.

For such citizens, they perceive the programs as being foisted on them without the government having asked for their opinions in where the houses will be placed or how the programs will run. In addition, policy makers also contribute to the resistance they face from the community because they sometimes misperceive the communities attitudes concerning incarceration. For instance, these policy makers view the community as punitive suggesting that the community does not support rehabilitation and re-integration of offenders into the community. This perception is wrong.

On the contrary, the community is in support of rehabilitation and inclusion of offenders (ICCA, 2010). Therefore, the perception and lack of including the community's views before judging them is partly a reason why agencies face resistance. The community's efficacy is a significant predictor of its reaction to sitting issues. A good relationship between the society and bodies running the programs will have substantial influence on the quality of officers, the community and offenders.

Although fear is among the factors that contribute to resistance, the agencies running these programs must recognize that it is natural (Krause, n.d). On the other hand, people perceive that the establishment of halfway houses has the capacity to stimulate crime leading to a decrease of their property values; therefore, this is a significant contributor to the resistance. Additionally, people living in the community are not aware of the overall safety and efficiency of halfway houses.

This is an important factor, which may contribute to substantial resistance to the agencies (Sechrest, 1991). Research suggests that the media does not accurately establish the safety of having the halfway houses in the community. In addition, owing to the several studies that claim the insecurity of these houses, the community is correct in resisting. This is because the people serving under the programs can escape and harm the community in the process.

Possible Solutions to avoid Resistance As stated earlier, some of the agencies establishing halfway houses may face resistance from some communities, which is valid. Therefore, there is a need to provide some solutions or suggestions in order to avoid such resistance in the future. The main reasons why the community should support the programs is; first to show their acknowledgement on their role in fighting crime in the community, and secondly, virtually all offenders serving under the programs will return to the community after their sentence.

One important thing the agencies should do to win the community's support and eliminate resistance is to include members of the community in some of the halfway house activities (Lindsay, 1990). The above is possible by offering voluntary service or others to work as staff members in administering the programs. In so doing, the agencies will prove that whatever is going on is not risky by including the community (ICCA, 2010). In addition, the agencies should make the community members understand that correctional programs increase public safety by reducing the recidivism rates.

Additionally, they should make them understand that the programs will help save taxpayer's money because the programs utilize correctional supervision, which is less costly compared.