discussion post

profilemico2014
chapter15PowerpointPresentation.ppt
Home>Reading homework help>discussion post

Chapter 15:
Juvenile and Adult Corrections

JUVENILE CORRECTIONS

  • The following characteristics are shared by programs that are successful in reducing the rates of violence, antisocial behavior, and risky health behavior in adolescents:
  • They are derived from sound theoretical rationales.
  • They address strong risk factors (such as substance abuse).
  • They involve long-term treatments, often lasting a year and sometimes much longer.
  • They work intensively with those targeted for treatment and often use a clinical approach.
  • They follow a cognitive/behavioral strategy.
  • They are multimodal and multi-contextual (they use different kinds of interventions, and deliver them in different contexts).
  • They focus on improving social competency and other skill development strategies for targeted youth and/or their families.
  • They are developmentally appropriate.

JUVENILE CORRECTIONS

  • They are not delivered in coercive institutional settings.
  • Services are delivered as intended.

JUVENILE CORRECTIONS

  • There are also common elements of programs that are ineffective:
  • They fail to address strong risk factors.
  • They are of limited duration.
  • They aggregate high-risk youth in ways that facilitate contagion.
  • Their implementation protocols are not clearly articulated.
  • Their staff are not well-supervised or held accountable for outcomes.

JUVENILE CORRECTIONS

  • They are limited to scare tactics or toughness strategies.
  • They consist largely of adults lecturing at youth.

JUVENILE CORRECTIONS

  • A number of influences have been noted as related to the risk of juvenile offending:
  • age at first referral
  • number of prior referrals
  • current offense
  • drug/alcohol problems
  • school difficulties
  • negative peers
  • family problems

ASSESSING RISK AND NEEDS
IN JUVENILES

  • Andrews, Bonta, and Hodge (1990) described the risk, need, and responsivity (RNR) concept used in evaluating juveniles.
  • Risk: the likelihood of committing future offenses should be evaluated; those at highest risk should receive the most intensive interventions

ASSESSING RISK AND NEEDS
IN JUVENILES

  • Needs: the deficits (e,g., substance abuse) that increase the risk of reoffending (criminogenic needs)
  • Responsivity: the likelihood of a favorable response to the interventions

ASSESSING RISK AND NEEDS
IN JUVENILES

  • There are two specialized tools that focus on the measurement of juvenile risk and needs:
  • The Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) and The Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory.
  • Both consider historical factors (e.g., previous offending), contextual factors (e.g., family), and personal factors (e.g., substance abuse).

ASSESSING RISK AND NEEDS
IN JUVENILES

  • Evaluating youth on the dimensions of risk and needs is valuable because:
  • 1) it structures the evaluation to require the psychologist to consider the influences that theory and research indicate are most strongly related to risk and needs
  • 2) it provides useful information for intervention-planning
  • 3) it offers one approach to measuring progress and current status

ASSESSING RISK AND NEEDS
IN JUVENILES

  • Youth may be placed on:
  • Probation (compliance is monitored by the probation officer).
  • School-based probation (attendance and performance in school are monitored).
  • Probation conditions may also include drug-use monitoring, substance abuse treatment, mental health treatment, and skills-based training in particular areas (e.g., anger management).
  • Probation may also vary in intensity, with intensive probation involving more frequent monitoring contact.

COMMUNITY-BASED INTERVENTIONS

  • The following interventions are empirically-supported, cost-effective, risk-reducing and amenable to quality assurance monitoring:
  • Multisystemic Therapy
  • Oregon Treatment Foster Care
  • Functional Family Therapy

COMMUNITY-BASED INTERVENTIONS

  • Focuses on multiple “systems”: the individual, family, peer, school, and social networks.
  • It delivers services based in the home, school, or elsewhere in the community, with 3-4 therapists working in a team.
  • Therapists are available 24/7, working to prevent problems or crises in the youth’s life from having a major impact.

MULTISYSTEMIC THERAPY

  • Multisystemic Therapy (MST) was more effective than usual diversion services on two outcomes:
  • 1) improving both self-reported and observed family relations
  • 2) decreasing youth behavior problems and time spent with deviant peers

MULTISYSTEMIC THERAPY

  • MST also reduces recidivism and decreases placements outside the home among juveniles charged with serious offenses.
  • There is also evidence that MST is effective with juveniles with substance abuse or dependence.

MULTISYSTEMIC THERAPY

  • Involves placing juveniles with specially trained foster parents rather than in residential placement.
  • The Oregon Treatment Foster Care (OFTC) team includes a case manager, therapists, and foster parents who are available 24/7 over the 6-12 months usually needed.

OREGON TREATMENT
FOSTER CARE

  • Youth treated with OTFC were more likely to complete treatment, spent more time with biological relatives, spent less time in detention over the next year, and were arrested less often during this period.

OREGON TREATMENT
FOSTER CARE

  • A community-based intervention, provided by a single therapist with weekly sessions over an average period of three months.
  • It is family-focused, and is often delivered in the home.
  • Functional Family Therapy (FFT) is associated with a significant reduction in recidivism when compared with “treatment as usual” or no treatment.

FUNCTIONAL FAMILY THERAPY

  • The recidivism rate for those receiving FFT was 50% lower than it was in the comparison group.
  • Researchers have found that FFT was effective in reducing youth behavioral problems--but only when the therapists adhered to the treatment model.

FUNCTIONAL FAMILY THERAPY

  • Not all communities have MST, OTFC, or FFT.
  • Many judges are inclined to place a youth in a secure residential facility because the publicly perceived risk to society is lower, even though the actual risk may not be.

SECURE RESIDENTIAL INTERVENTIONS

  • Unfortunately, the impact of different placements for juveniles who commit serious offenses is a very difficult issue to answer through research (ideally need research with random assignment).
  • One noted weakness of residential interventions: because of the location of the program, it is much more difficult to involve the families in a meaningful way.

SECURE RESIDENTIAL INTERVENTIONS

  • Residential placements for juveniles has been shown to be effective, particularly when they focus on skills training (in areas like anger control and decision-making), vocational training, and educational and mental health needs and also employ a treatment model that is “checked” through quality assurance.

SECURE RESIDENTIAL INTERVENTIONS

  • When should juveniles be placed in the community vs. assigned to secure residential placements?
  • Higher risk juveniles, with a history of prior offenses, may need more secure placement.
  • A judge might decide that a serious offense merits a secure placement.

SECURE RESIDENTIAL INTERVENTIONS

  • Sometimes it can be important to remove a juvenile from extremely problematic circumstances (e.g., involving family) that would continue with a community placement.

SECURE RESIDENTIAL INTERVENTIONS

  • There are six areas that are important in the reentry planning process:
  • 1) family functioning
  • 2) housing (if not living with the family)
  • 3) school or job
  • 4) mental health and/or substance abuse services
  • 5) monitoring
  • 6) social support

REENTRY

  • Intensive aftercare addresses the needs of chronic and serious juvenile offenders returning from residential placement. It uses:
  • 1) pre-release planning
  • 2) a structured transition involving institutional and aftercare staff prior to, and following, release
  • 3) long-term re-integrative activities to facilitate service delivery and social control

REENTRY

  • “Wraparound services” involve the delivery of individualized services from collaborating agencies such as those responsible for mental health care, educational services, and juvenile corrections.
  • Such services are useful particularly for youth with serious mental or emotional problems.

REENTRY

  • Assessing and Diverting Offenders
  • Offenders who are convicted of criminal offenses (or charged with offenses but diverted from standard prosecution) are assessed, either as part of the legal proceeding or post-sentencing, to gauge their risk and rehabilitation needs.
  • In the prison system, this is called classification.

ADULT CORRECTIONS

  • Risk-needs assessment can be measured using an instrument such as the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI).

ASSESSING AND DIVERTING OFFENDERS

  • Probation for adult offenders is a frequent form of disposition of criminal charges.
  • Offenses for those on probation included misdemeanors (51%), felonies (47%), and “other” (3%). The most frequent offenses of those on probation were drug charges (27%); this was also the most frequent offense for those on parole (37%).

COMMUNITY-BASED INTERVENTIONS

  • The number of conditions and the nature of the monitoring can vary, depending on the individual’s needs.

COMMUNITY-BASED INTERVENTIONS

  • Standard conditions involve specifying how often individuals must meet with a parole or probation officer, where they will live, whether they will work, and certain activities that must be avoided (e.g., drinking). Additional conditions can be added as needed (e.g., mental health treatment).

COMMUNITY-BASED INTERVENTIONS

  • Neither punishing drug offenders by incarcerating them nor providing treatment for drug addiction has been particularly effective in reducing the prevalence of drug abuse and drug-related crime.
  • About 70% of drug offenders reoffend within three years of release from prison.
  • Drug courts provide an intensive alternative intervention.

DRUG COURTS IN CORRECTIONS

  • Drug courts provide judicially-supervised drug abuse treatment and case management services to nonviolent drug-involved offenders, taking them out of the standard “prosecution/conviction/incarceration” process.
  • Participation is voluntary, and whether a defendant is eligible may be at the discretion of the prosecutor.

DRUG COURTS IN CORRECTIONS

  • Diversion in drug courts comes in two forms:
  • 1) Those charged with a crime may be diverted entirely from prosecution with the stipulation that they successfully complete the requirements imposed in drug court or face reinstatement of prosecution.
  • 2) Those who are convicted of a crime may be diverted to drug court to avoid prison or to modify their probation conditions.

DRUG COURTS IN CORRECTIONS

  • Drug courts are more effective than virtually any other approach with substance abusing offenders.
  • They are particularly good at reducing drug use and criminal recidivism.

DRUG COURTS IN CORRECTIONS

  • Mental health courts can handle both felony and misdemeanor offenders.
  • Most mental health courts feature:
  • a) a specialized docket for selected offenders
  • b) judicial supervision of clients
  • c) regularly scheduled hearings
  • d) specific criteria that must be met to remain in, and complete, the program

MENTAL HEALTH COURTS
IN CORRECTIONS

  • The limited research that exists suggests that mental health courts can have a favorable impact on symptom amelioration and reoffense risk reduction when services are delivered and clients participate.

MENTAL HEALTH COURTS
IN CORRECTIONS

  • Differences between jails and prisons
  • A jail houses both individuals who are pretrial (those who have been charged with offenses, but not yet convicted) and others who have been convicted of relatively minor offenses, usually with sentences no longer than a year.
  • Those incarcerated in prison have all been convicted (with sentences longer than those associated with jail inmates). Prisons also house those who have received a death sentence.

INSTITUTIONAL INTERVENTIONS

  • The Federal Bureau of Prisons provides a range of programs for inmates that include:
  • Substance abuse treatment
  • Educational and vocational training
  • Skills development
  • Religious programs
  • Work programs

INSTITUTIONAL INTERVENTIONS

  • Many of the same kinds of services are provided in prisons operated by the states.
  • Jails focus on immediate needs (e.g., mental health) rather than longer-term rehabilitation.

INSTITUTIONAL INTERVENTIONS

  • There are four broad purposes served by mental health professionals, particularly psychologists, in both jails and prisons:
  • classification
  • consultation/crisis intervention
  • rehabilitation
  • reentry planning

INSTITUTIONAL INTERVENTIONS

  • There is a much higher rate of severe mental illness in jail than in the general population.
  • Psychological services provided to jail inmates can include:
  • Screening, evaluation, classification
  • Diversion
  • Suicide prevention

THE ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS IN JAILS

  • Crisis intervention
  • Case management services/reentry
  • Coordinating volunteers (e.g., mentoring)
  • Teaching life skills
  • Group therapy for inmates and their families

THE ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS IN JAILS

  • Larger jails with more resources might be able to offer most or all of these services, so a psychologist’s role in such jails would be more varied. Smaller jails, by contrast, might be limited to screening, suicide prevention, and crisis intervention.

THE ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS IN JAILS

  • Imprisoning offenders is not necessarily the most effective approach to reducing the risk of future offending.

THE ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS IN JAILS

  • Appropriate treatment systematically assessed offender risk and needs with specialized tools, targeted the criminogenic needs of offenders in treatment, and used cognitive-behavioral approaches to change deficits and increase strengths.

THE ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS IN JAILS

  • Another approach that shows promise, particularly in treating drug offenders in prison, is the therapeutic community (TC).
  • The staff, other clients, and physical setting are all part of the therapeutic environment.

THE ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS IN PRISONS

  • Group therapy, individual counseling, “community meetings” involving all residents, and specialized interventions to build skills in areas such as anger control, are all used.

THE ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS IN PRISONS

  • Research by Bourgon and Armstrong (2005) suggests that in correctional interventions with adults (as with juveniles):
  • It is useful to employ a formal, structured approach to assessing relevant needs and intervening according to those needs.

THE ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS IN PRISONS

  • It is possible to identify a “dosage effect” for relevant treatment, and to administer such treatment according to who is likely to receive the most benefit.
  • It is feasible to have a favorable impact over a relatively short period of time.

THE ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS IN PRISONS

  • Many inmates show a pattern of coping mechanisms in response to high levels of prison stress.
  • They may:
  • become hypervigilant in order to deal with the significant risks to their personal safety
  • learn to project a “tough guy veneer”
  • socially isolate themselves and suppress any signs of emotion
  • become generally distrustful of others

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF IMPRISONMENT

  • Inmates report that their initial period of confinement is the most difficult.
  • Over time, a gradual process takes place in which prisoners adjust to their environment (i.e., prisonization).

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF IMPRISONMENT

  • Reentry focuses on preparing inmates to move from incarceration back into the community.
  • The priorities for reentry begin with the goal of reducing the risk of reoffending.
  • Reentry can include services provided during custody, in preparation for release, and during the period of community supervision and eventual discharge.

REENTRY

  • The custody phase involves measuring offenders’ risks, needs, and strengths upon entry to the correctional facility and providing interventions designed to reduce risk, address needs, and build strengths.
  • The release phase includes inmate release preparation, with a parole plan for:
  • supervision
  • housing
  • employment
  • drug testing
  • other considerations

REENTRY

  • There is also a release decision-making that concerns the parole decision.
  • The community supervision/discharge phase involves:
  • supervision and services
  • revocation decision-making (including graduated sanctions in response to infractions)
  • discharge and aftercare, when community correctional supervision is terminated

REENTRY

  • The “community classification center” is part of a current trend in reentry. Such facilities accept inmates who are released from prison.

REENTRY

  • Rather than place released inmates directly in the community, the centers provide assessment for a limited period of time, and structures the reentry process so that individuals receive housing and services that are consistent with their needs.

REENTRY

  • Reentry, as applied to parole, is growing in popularity.
  • Research is still needed to determine the impact of the program on the services delivered, and whether the delivery of such services was related to rearrest.

REENTRY