Since the Middle of the 20th Century, Prisons and Other Corrections Issues

¶ … corrections models in the United States have changed significantly over the past several generations, from a rehabilitative toward a punitive paradigm. After World War Two, a strong sense of national security and prosperity prevailed in the United States, leading to a corrections system that was based more on rehabilitation than on punishment. During these idealistic times, criminals were believed to be "ill," and correctable via a treatment model ("History and Development of Corrections 1700-Present," n.d.). Trust in governmental institutions also helped politicians and the public alike agree that corrections should be built upon the theory that criminal behavior can be unlearned, or "corrected." The rehabilitation approach persisted well into the 1960s, as humanistic psychology informed corrections models. A humanistic worldview encouraged "deinstitutionalization" of corrections through the use of community-based services like halfway houses and probation ("History and Development of Corrections 1700-Present," n.d.). Sentencing policy during the middle of the 20th century was more likely to include mandatory maximums than minimums, with "indeterminate" sentencing trending in criminal justice (Mackenzie, 2001). Judges enjoyed a high level of discretion when issuing sentences. Programs to help inmates, such as vocational training and reintegration assistance, were established even if they were "often poorly implemented and funded," (Mackenzie, 2001, p. 7). These idealistic times shifted dramatically and radically in the early 1970s.

There are two main reasons why the correctional models changed from rehabilitation toward punishment. One reason is increased pessimism, both in terms of the public's mistrust of government and also in terms of the lack of faith in the ability of criminals to be rehabilitated. It was believed that "nothing works," and that a stricter approach to crime and criminal justice was needed to keep the public safe (Mackenzie, 2001, p. 8). The "war on crime" model evolved from official government reports, leading to a new era in corrections that defined responses to crime throughout the latter half of the 20th century and the early 21st as well. In addition to claims that rehabilitation simply was not working to reduce rates of recidivism or overall rates of crime, critics of the humanistic models of corrections also pointed out that judicial discretion in sentencing tended to favor the wealthy and advantaged classes of society (Mackenzie, 2001). The criminalization of nonviolent drug-related crimes and the politicization of the "war on drugs" also contributed to a shift in correctional policies. As drug-related crimes were reframed as criminal rather than mental health issues, incarceration was offered as a legitimate response. Mass incarceration became the pattern in corrections in the late 20th century.

Limits to judicial discretion have characterized correctional models since the 1980s, when "three strikes" and other "harsh justice" policies prevailed ("History of American Corrections," n.d.). With mandatory minimums and "three strikes" laws, judges were no longer free to offer alternatives to incarceration, which led to the proliferation of prisons and to the massive numbers of American inmates. By the end of the 20th century, about two million Americans were behind bars (Christianson, n.d.). The knee-jerk use of incarceration as a sentence for criminal behavior represents the trend of "warehousing" offenders ("History of American Corrections," n.d.). Just as businesses expand their geographic footprint in order to expand inventory, so too have correctional facilities expanded in both size and number. Both maximum and minimum security correctional facilities have been built on the notion that offenders need to simply be separated from the general public and punished, but not necessarily rehabilitated.

Prison overcrowding is not a new problem, but it has reached unprecedented proportions over the last few decades. To alleviate the burden on government budgets and resources, an increasing number of prisons and correctional services like professional guards have become privatized. The privatization of corrections represents the most recent and radical shift in criminal justice. Privatization presents innumerable ethical and logistical problems, though. A reaction to prison overcrowding and the social problems associated with mass incarceration has led to an increased number of states looking to reform their correctional policies and procedures. As Wagner (2014) points out, many states have opted to reform their correctional models to reduce prison overcrowding its associated social, economic, ethical, and political problems.