Fatma alsadi24-11-2019PRISON AND REENTRYThe term normalizati.docx

Fatma alsadi
24-11-2019
PRISON AND REENTRY
The term normalization means that prison life is brought close
to normal life. Prisoners are allowed to live a normal life just
like they will live after they are released, the aim of which is to
let them adapt earlier in advance. On the other side,
humanization means treating prisoners like human beings and
respecting and trusting them.
There are differences between the Norway system and that of
the US. First of all, the prison officials in the Norway system
are insulated from political pressures while governors in the US
can replace some leaders. The Norwegian attitude towards the
prisoners is very different from the American attitude towards
their prisoners. Prisoners in Norway live in small communities
in the prisons where they can engage in various activities such
as farming and learn technical skills (James, 2013). They are
also paid to work and use the money to purchase breakfast and
super. On the other side, prisoners in the US are not paid and do
not cook. The Norway system gives prisoners more liberty than
the US system (Chammah, 2017). For example, a prisoner in
Norway may be allowed to escort their children to school while
in the US prisoners are not allowed to freely walk out of the
prisons.
The reoffending rates in Norway are lower than those in the
United States because Norwegian prisoners are allowed to live
the same life they will experience once they are out of the
prisons. The US system is harsher than the Norway system, and
this has a huge impact on the reoffending rates. Norwegian
prisoners find it easy to live with other community members
once they are out of the prisons because their prison life was
normalized.

REFERENCES
Chammah, M. (2017). I did it Norway: Some American prisons
are singing a European tune. Marshall Project.
James, E. (2013). The Norwegian prison where inmates are
treated like people. The Guardian, 25(02), 2013.
from the SAGE Social Science Collections. All Rights
Reserved. at PORTLAND STATE UNIV on June 15,
2015cad.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://cad.sagepub.com/
at PORTLAND STATE UNIV on June 15,

Chapter 12: Capital Punishment
CHAPTER OVERVIEW
After a brief review of capital punishment in colonial and early
America, the chapter considers
capital punishment in the modern (i.e., post-1972) with
particular reference to where executions

are occurring and to the characteristics of those executed. The
section on capital punishment and
the law reviews capital crimes—noting that all executions since
1976 have been for murder with
aggravating circumstances—and highlights the key U.S.
Supreme Court cases of Furman v.
Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia. The characteristics of persons on
death row are reviewed and the
point is made that most death-row prisoners leave death row
without being executed. Key
arguments, born for and against, the death penalty are presented
with the topics of deterrence,
fairness, retribution, and innocence receiving individual
attention. The chapter concludes with a
discussion of public opinion and the death penalty.
CHAPTER LEARNING OUTCOMES
1. Outline the history of capital punishment in the United
States.
2. Explain the legal provisions for capital punishment in the
United States.
3. Describe the characteristics of death-row prisoners and
explain how some leave death-
row without being executed.
4. Summarize the arguments for and against the use of the death
penalty.
5. Discuss the influence of public opinion on the death penalty.
LECTURE OUTLINE
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT YESTERDAY AND TODAY
• Capital punishment in the U.S. is best viewed as two historical
periods; early and

modern, with the 1972 Supreme Court decision Furman v.
Georgia serving as the
dividing event.
A Short History of Capital Punishment in the United States
o By the start of the American Revolution, all 13 colonies used
the death penalty—
typically by hanging.
o Nineteenth century saw more reliance on imprisonment,
halting of public executions,
and a move to discretionary rather than mandatory capital
punishment.
Capital Punishment in the Modern Era
o 31 states, the federal government, and the military have death
penalty statutes.
o Most executions take place in the South, fewest in the
Northeast.
o All jurisdictions with the death penalty have authorized lethal
injection as a method
of execution.
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND THE LAW
• Constitutional scholars believe the Founding Fathers intended
to allow for the death
penalty since it was authorized in all 13 colonies and there are
specific provisions in the
Constitution that suggest the taking of life is possible.

Entering Death Row
o State and federal statues provide for the death penalty for a
variety of crimes, but
there has been no execution since 1976 for a crime other than
murder with
aggravating circumstances—and it is unlikely that the Supreme
Court will allow
someone to be executed for a crime not involving murder.
Capital Punishment and the Courts
o In Furman v. Georgia (1972) the Supreme Court finds capital
punishment to be cruel
and unusual because it was being imposed in an arbitrary and
capricious manner.
o The Furman ruling was not against capital punishment itself;
it was against the way it
was being imposed, so removing the arbitrary nature should
allow the death penalty
to be constitutional.
o In Gregg v. Georgia (1976) the Supreme Court ruled that
Georgia’s new death
penalty statute removed the arbitrary nature by creating a
bifurcated trial with the
first trial stage determines guilt and a second stage to decide
sentence of death or life
imprisonment.

CHARACTERISTICS OF DEATH-ROW PRISONERS
• Most state prisoners on death row are in the South.
• Almost half of all death row prisoners are in CA, TX, and FL.
• Most are white non-Hispanic males.
Leaving Death Row without Being Executed
o Most death row prisoners leave death row without being
executed.
o Reasons for removal other than execution include death from
other causes, receiving
clemency, and having their sentence or conviction overturned.
ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
• Capital punishment has been debated by abolitionists
(opposing death penalty) and
retentionists (favoring death penalty) on the basis of many
topics, with a few covered
here.
Deterrence
o Abolitionists argue that the death penalty will not deter the
majority of murders
because typically they are emotional, not rational acts.
Statistical studies show no
measurable relation between homicide rates and the death
penalty.
o Retentionists argue that the death penalty’s deterrent effect is
achieved through

socialization so that the individual comes to internalize the
association of act and
penalty. Further, some econometric modeling studies find a
deterrent effect.
Fairness
o Abolitionists argue that the death penalty is applied most
often to men, poor people,
and to racial and ethnic minorities whose victims were white—
despite murderers also
being women, rich people, and Caucasians with minority
victims.
o Retentionists argue that if men, the poor, and persons with
white victims get the
death penalty disproportionately, maybe it’s because they
commit capital murder
disproportionately. They also say that not executing some who
deserve it is no reason
to stop executing others who deserve it.
Retribution
o Abolitionists argue that retribution simply requires society’s
worst punishment be
applied to its worst crime and that if society’s harshest
punishment is life
imprisonment, that becomes the appropriate penalty for murder.
o Retentionists argue that it is essentially a social law that a
wrongful act must be

punished, and lex talionis requires that the punishment reflect
the crime. So,
execution is society’s correct response to murder.
Innocence
o Abolitionists argue that whether the number of actually
innocent persons executed is
small or large, the possibility of executing an innocent person is
reason enough to
abolish the death penalty.
o Retentionists argue that the horror of a rare mistake is
outweighed by the benefits of
execution when it is appropriate.
PUBLIC OPINION AND THE DEATH PENALTY
• Public opinion for the death penalty was often under 50%
prior to 1972.
• Support peaked at 80% favoring in 1994.
• Support has been hovering around 60% the last several years,
with the lowest level of
support (60%) occurring in 2013.
• The Marshall hypothesis suggests that as people learn more
about caprice, bias, and
mistake in the application of the death penalty, life without
parole (LWOP) will become
the preferred punishment over the death penalty.
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

1. In December of each year, the Death Penalty Information
Center publishes a year-end
report. Visit http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/reports#YER to
find the most recent report.
2. Visit the Gallup webpage on reasons for supporting the death
penalty at
http://www.gallup.com/poll/178799/americans-eye-eye-top-
reason-death-penalty.aspx
3. Assign students (or accept volunteers) to read the Frontline
article at
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/criminal-justice/why-
the-death-penalty-is-on-
the-decline/ then report on the content to the class. Lead
discussion on the four reasons
given for why the death penalty is on the decline.
Chapter 13: Juvenile Corrections
CHAPTER OVERVIEW
The process for handling juvenile offenders is different enough
from the way adult criminals are
handled as to need separate attention. To provide context, this
chapter briefly reviews the history
of the juvenile court then describes terms relevant to the
juvenile justice system—with
comparison to the term used for adults. The process for moving
juveniles through the system is
described, including both informal and formal proceedings, and
a chapter timeline highlights key
events from 1899 through 2012. Since the transfer of juvenile
offenders to adult court is possible
or required in every state, the three models by which that

transfer can occur are reviewed.
Discussion of juvenile corrections specifically is provided with
reference to community-based
responses, then to residential-based responses. The chapter
concludes by highlighting two
especially important issues confronting juvenile corrections
today: Disproportionate minority
contact, and how girls are provided for in a system designed for
boys.
1. Outline the development of the juvenile justice system.
2. Explain the age limits and types of offenses handled in the
juvenile justice system.
3. Describe the juvenile court process and the characteristics of
juvenile offenders.
4. Explain the procedures by which juveniles can be tried as
adults in criminal court.
5. Describe community-based treatment programs for juvenile
offenders.
6. Describe juvenile residential facilities and the treatment
programs available in them.
7. Summarize issues confronting juvenile corrections.
LECTURE OUTLINE
DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF THE JUVENILE
JUSTICE SYSTEM
• First juvenile court appeared in 1899 in Cook County
(Chicago) IL.
• Established to provide for both the care and control of

juveniles.
• Care function gave juvenile court control over children in
need of supervision due to
dependence, neglect, or abuse.
• Control function reflected desire to respond to misbehaving
juveniles with more
compassion than was present in the criminal justice system.
PROCESSING JUVENILE OFFENDERS
• How juveniles are processed through the juvenile justice
system differs from the way
adults are processed in the criminal court system.
Age Limits: Who Are the Juveniles?
o Age of juvenile court jurisdiction varies by state.
o The oldest age at which a state’s juvenile court can have
jurisdiction over juveniles is
17. That is also the most common upper age limit in the U.S.
Juvenile Offense Categories: Reasons for Coming to Juvenile
Court
o Situations wherein child/juvenile has been neglected, abused,
exploited, or
mistreated.
o Situations wherein child/juvenile has committed a status
offense (i.e., actions deemed
inappropriate or undesirable when committed by juveniles (e.g.,
truancy, running

away).
o Situations wherein child/juvenile has committed a
delinquency offense (i.e., actions
that would be criminal if done by an adult—ranging from
shoplifting to murder).
JUVENILE OFFENDERS IN JUVENILE COURT
• Juveniles can be referred by police, social service agencies,
schools, parents, probation
officers, and victims.
• After referral, the case can be handled informally
(nonpetitioned) or formally
(petitioned).
Characteristics of Juvenile Offenders
o Most delinquency cases handled by the juvenile courts involve
property offenses as
the most serious charge.
o Females make up about 28% of the delinquency cases
nationwide, but the proportion
has steadily increased from 19% in 1985.
o Most juveniles processed through the juvenile court are white,
but black youths are
disproportionately represented.
Due Process and Juveniles

o Initially the juvenile court was not adversarial so due process
protections were
considered unnecessary; but court decisions beginning in 1960s
granted some due
process protection.
o Right to fair notice of the charges (In re Gault).
o Right to representation by counsel (In re Gault).
o Right to face and cross-examine accusers (In re Gault).
o Privilege against self-incrimination (In re Gault).
o Proof beyond reasonable doubt required (In re Winship).
JUVENILE OFFENDERS IN ADULT COURT
• Every state allows or requires juveniles to be tried as adults in
criminal court under
certain circumstances.
The Three Models
o Judicial waiver (juvenile court judge waives jurisdiction).
o Direct file (prosecutor decides to try the juvenile as an adult).
o Statutory exclusion (criminal courts have original jurisdiction
for certain crimes
committed by juveniles).
Blended Sentencing
o Juvenile blended sentences (juvenile court judge is allowed to
impose both juvenile
and adult sanctions on certain categories of serious juvenile
offenders).
o Criminal blended sentences (criminal court judge may, under

some circumstances)
impose juvenile sentences that would typically be available only
to juvenile court.
Trends in Judicial Waiver
o Transfer laws generally expanded dramatically during the
1980s and 1990s.
o Today, judicial waivers are being used less often.
o Also seeing changes in transfer laws themselves. Some states
have limited their
transfer and waiver laws thereby creating more options for
juvenile courts.
COMMUNITY-BASED RESPONSES TO JUVENILE
OFFENDERS
• Juveniles on probation or in the community after residential
placement typically
participate in community-based programs.
• Teen courts provide an interesting diversion program using
court-like procedures wherein
young offenders with less-serious violations can voluntarily
have their case heard before
a panel of age peers.
• Two effective programs are Functional Family Therapy (FFT)
and Multisystemic
Therapy (MST).
RESIDENTIAL-BASED RESPONSES TO JUVENILE
OFFENDERS

• Juvenile offenders receiving a custodial placement are
typically sent to residential
facilities such as a camp, group home, or correctional facility
Characteristics of Custody Facilities and the Youths in Them
o Half of the facilities are privately operated, but most
offenders are held in public
facilities.
o The majority of juveniles in custody are being held for
delinquency offenses—
usually offenses against persons.
Institutional Programs
o Successful programs are those that support mental health
issues rather than focusing
on punishment, focus on specific skills such as behavior
management or family
counseling, involve cognitive-behavioral therapy, and provide
aggression
replacement training such as anger control.
ISSUES CONFRONTING JUVENILE CORRECTIONS
• Of the many issues to consider, the focus here is on the
overrepresentation of minorities
and problems presented by girls in a system designed for boys.

Disproportionate Minority Contact
o Minority youth ages 10-17 are 25% of the U.S. population but
represent about 33%
of juvenile arrests, about 33% of delinquency cases, and 66% of
youth in residential
placement.
o Factors contributing to the disproportionate residential
placement include activities in
the juvenile justice system itself, socioeconomic conditions,
educational system
inadequacies, and family dynamics.
Girls in a System Designed for Boys
o Girls are typically placed in programs created for delinquent
boys but evaluation of
programs provide little information about their appropriateness
for girls.
o Given the different developmental pathways—including
pathways to delinquency—
followed by females and males, the need for gender-specific
programming becomes
evident.
ADDITIONAL ASSIGNMENTS AND CLASS ACTIVITIES
1. The Marshall Project’s article Who’s a Kid?
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2016/10/27/who-s-a-
kid#.86Ra2K2SL) presents
interesting information and seeming contradictions about our

current understanding of
behavioral changes throughout the lifespan and whether the
justice system is keeping
pace.
2. Read the Frontline article at
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/criminal-
justice/stickup-kid/why-states-are-changing-course-on-juvenile-
crime/
3. Girl Trouble, an award-winning documentary featured on
PBS (see
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/girltrouble/film.html) looks
at three teenagers in San
Francisco’s juvenile justice system over a four-year period.
Chapter 14: Revisiting Evidence-Based Practices and What
Works
CHAPTER OVERVIEW
In this concluding chapter the concept of evidence-based
practices is reemphasized by reviewing
some of the “what works” examples that have been given
throughout the book. Cognitive
behavioral approaches are highlighted as being especially
effective and quite versatile since they
can be used in both residential and community-based settings.
In addition to reviewing the
effective programs and practices, the chapter includes brief
discussion of financial considerations
related to corrections and the need for more rationality in
corrections policy. The chapter, and the
book, concludes with some ideas about the future of corrections.

1. Summarize evidence-based practices that work in corrections
to reduce recidivism.
2. Articulate how the corrections system can become “Smart on
Crime.”
LECTURE OUTLINE
WHAT WORKS IN CORRECTIONS
• The key is to use techniques and programs shown to reduce
recidivism or drug abuse and
to discard those that don’t.
Revisiting Correctional System Expectations Versus Stated
Mission
o Although mission statement of correctional institutions can be
diverse, there is
invariably an emphasis on public safety, followed by such goals
as rehabilitation,
incapacitation, and reintegration.
o New themes include staff/inmate safety, humane treatment of
inmates, use of
evidence-based techniques, and cost-efficient practices.
Cognitive Behavioral Treatment
o The most effective type of treatment for offenders is the
cognitive behavioral

approach.
o Assumes that behavioral change can only occur by
understanding that there are errors
in the way offenders think about certain issues.
Community Supervision
o People most likely to be successful on probation are over age
30, have stable
employment, had at least a high school diploma or GED
certificate, has completed
treatment, and lives in a stable housing situation surrounded by
positive family
support.
Jail and Prison
o Unlike community-based corrections and treatment programs,
jails and prisons have
fewer options for evidence-based practices that work to reduce
long-term recidivism.
o Learning new skills while incarcerated (e.g., increasing
education levels and
employment skills) can help with reentry.
COST SAVINGS BEST PRACTICES
• Need to get the best return on invested dollars.
• Prison industry, long-term drug treatment, and education
programs are the three most
beneficial programs compared to their costs.

RETURNING RATIONALITY TO CORRECTIONS POLICY
Being Smart on Crime
o U.S. Department of Justice review of the criminal justice
system resulted in the Smart
on Crime initiative.
o One recommended change was decentralization in order to
allow each federal
prosecutor to create their own agenda for identifying crime
problems and needs that
are unique to their district.
o Another change was to reduce federal prison sentence lengths
for drug offenders
without ties to large-scale criminal organizations.
o A third change was to make eligible for community-based
prison alternatives
offenders who did not pose a threat to public safety.
o Increasing the eligibility for seeking compassionate release
was a fourth change.
o A final change was to increase reentry efforts in each federal
district.
THE FUTURE OF CORRECTIONS
• Top four critical issues to be addressed in the near future are
(1) supervision and care of
mentally ill offenders, (2) correctional staff recruitment and
retention/wellness, (3)
reducing the use of administrative segregation, and (4) better

management of correctional
population increases.
• Chapters 6 and 7 included discussion of the first three, so now
we look at managing the
correctional population.
Performance-Based Measures
• Today, programs receiving funding are expected to meet
performance-based
measures (e.g., recidivism reduction, decreasing revocations
back to jail, increasing
employment raters).
• Justice Reinvestment Initiative works alongside performance-
based measures to
reward states for reducing incarceration costs.
• Money saved when imprisonment is used less should be used
to build infrastructure
in high-crime neighborhoods.
• We should focus less on offender deficits and more on positive
behavior and
investment in vulnerable communities.
ADDITIONAL ASSIGNMENTS AND CLASS ACTIVITIES
1. If you have not been visiting Crime
Solution

s.gov (see
http://www.crimesolutions.gov/TopicDetails.aspx?ID=2) during
the term, now would be
a good time to do so!
2. The “what works/what doesn’t” list provided in Figure 14-1
provides topics for
discussion—especially from the “doesn’t work” column. Learn
why Scared Straight
programs (see
http://www.crimesolutions.gov/PracticeDetails.aspx?ID=4) and
DARE
programs (see
http://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=99) are
identified
as showing no effect.
PUNISHMENT & CORRECTIONS
ESSAY ASSIGNMENT GRADING RUBRIC

LOWER RANGE (0 – 6 pts)
MIDDLE
(7 - 8 pts)
UPPER RANGE
(9 - 10 pts) SCORE
THESIS/FOCUS
Essay does not address all parts of
the question; essay addresses other
issues/topics unrelated to the
question
Essay addresses all parts of the
question; essay does not address
other issues/topics unrelated to the
question
COURSE
CONTENT

Connections to course content (i.e.,
lectures, textbook) missing or
linkage unclear; course content
poorly understood
Integrates range of concepts, facts,
ideas from course content;
demonstrates accurate understanding
of course content
SPELLING &
GRAMMAR
Significant spelling, punctuation,
and/or grammatical errors
Free of spelling, punctuation, and
grammatical errors
READABILITY &

STRUCTURE
Paragraphs disorganized,
tangential, or unrelated to one
another; transitions missing or
poorly done; weak ending; difficult
to read and engage with essay due
to writing
Paragraphs logically organized to build
support for thesis/position; effective
transitions connecting paragraphs;
strong conclusion; engaging essay
that was easy to read; educated
reader about given topic or presented
convincing argument in favor of thesis
GENERAL
COMMENTS

Note: Essays that appear to be based solely on other courses,
those that have no obvious connection to the present course, and
“journals”
focusing solely on one’s own life experiences will receive
deductions in all areas above no matter how well written.
11/16/2015
CCJ 240 Punishment and Corrections
Short Essay Assignment 4: Correctional Issues and Challenges
Please provide a one- to two-page written response to the
question listed below.
Your response should address all parts of the question and
integrate the
assigned readings and lecture material as appropriate. Your
response should

adhere to APA format, with 1” margins all around, Times New
Roman, 12-pt font,
with a left general alignment and double lined spacing. You
must appropriately
cite all references used in your response. You do not need to
seek out other
sources of information for this assignment as you have been
provided with more
than enough information in class and through the assigned
readings to address
this question. If you do refer to material not assigned in the
class, you must also
list them in a supplemental reference page. To receive full
credit, you must use
proper grammar and correct spelling, write in complete
sentences, use
appropriate punctuation, and avoid using abbreviations. I
strongly encourage you
to proof read your essay before turning it in.
Question
Evidence-based practices are key to ensuring desired sentencing
outcomes are
achieved. However, sometimes such practices don’t “feel” like

punishment and
they seem to focus exclusively on offenders and ignore victims
in the process.
How would you explain the importance of supporting evidence-
based practices in
corrections to victims and victims rights groups? Why should
they support them
over more traditional, retributive measures?

Fatma alsadi24-11-2019PRISON AND REENTRYThe term normalizati.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from lmelaine

More from lmelaine (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Fatma alsadi24-11-2019PRISON AND REENTRYThe term normalizati.docx