Rehabilitation vs. Punishment On the other hand, correction by punishment involved subjecting the criminal to unpleasant situations like hard labor as a means of correction.
When criminal or delinquents have been duly sentenced in the court of law, they are locked up in various penitentiaries in the country. These incarceration centers vary from one to another in terms of security level, the size, population and further more differences but one similarity that they share is they are meant for releasing (if the sentence allows) back to the society a better person that the one who went into custody.
However, while in incarceration centers, there tend to be a clear cut difference between rehabilitation and punishment, there is therefore the risk of emphasizing one over the other which may not mould the best individual whom the society expects to walk out of the jail doors at the end of the sentence.
To have a clear picture of where the difference between rehabilitation and punishment ideology comes in, it is worth looking at what really defines each concept. Rehabilitation advocates for correction of the criminal by treatment. It is considered to date the most significance face of helping criminals get out of their criminal activities. Even with the onslaught of getting tough on ...
The two bear some differences which are very significant in the bid to understand the difference between them as modes of correction. These differences are outlined vividly by Gadek, R., (2008) as follows;
Rehabilitation will give the individual the chance to think over the problem, comes to term with his wrongs and then learn on behavior change in a quest to avoid repeat of the same again in the future. On the other hand, punishment will only involve cooping up an individual in a cell without a proper guide on how to avoid repeat of the mistake again. This may not necessarily deter repeat of the crime.
One going through rehabilitation will have an easier time reentering the society and integrating back into the social system since it has not as much stigma as being locked up in the cells. On the contrary, punishment doesn't give the offender the chance and time to be helped in their bid to reenter the society, more often that not they are segregated and don't get to talk to the rehabilitation officers unless an alternative program is put in place as they are behind bars.
The other difference comes in the application of the two means of correction. Rehabilitation is widely used among the juvenile delinquents since they need guidance on decisions to make in the future and the harms that crime can cause one or the society. The punishment model passes more for use among the adult offenders who are deemed to have had the capacity of judgment,…
On the other hand, correction by punishment involved subjecting the criminal to unpleasant situations like hard labor as a means of correction.
Criminal Law and Psychopathy I. Introduction Various studies have in the past indicated that there is a high correlation between violence/criminal behavior and psychopathy. This would largely be expected given that psychological studies into the character and disposition of psychopaths has demonstrated that the need for control (or power) as well as egocentrism, which also happen to be the dominant character traits of psychopaths, are predictors for deviant or antisocial behavior. The
This had lead to a growing number of states segregating juveniles and adults within the adult prison. Judges are also taking into account the availability of beds when they determine sentences for juveniles that have been tried as adults and may go so far as putting the youth on probation rather than putting them in an adult prison with adult prisoners (Should Juveniles Be Tried as Adults, 2007). It is
I do, however, contend that appropriate rehabilitation programs will make this at least unlikely. On the other hand, one must acknowledge that such rehabilitation programs are not always available and often not appropriate to the specific person having committed the crime. Hence, what I am suggesting is that more research be commissioned to create better ways of responding to various criminal offenses. Offenders of certain petty crimes, for example, can
Specifically, that approach must offer a method of reversing, or at least substantially reducing the impact of those factors. Furthermore, since the particular variables differ among different criminal offenders, an approach that is likely to be successful must incorporate aspects of assessment of the individual for the purposes of designing treatments that address the many different paths to criminal conduct. In that regard, Andrews (1995) offers a comprehensive set of
Criminal Justice The problem of how to treat and processing juvenile offenders through the court system has been an issue before the establishment of the first juvenile court in 1899. Before it was recognized that minors needed their own court system, they were processed through the adult court and often received harsh punishment. Separate juvenile courts became evident within all states by 1945. However, the juvenile court system was based upon
The problem of determining the right approach is compounded by the effects of the culture of violence to which many young offenders are exposed. In some cases, it is possible to reform their behavior but in other cases, juvenile offenders already take on the hardened attitude normally associated with adult offenders. As a result, some juveniles are too far gone to reach through non-punitive methods by the time they reach