Policing and Penal Services - Essay Example

?How can the police OR prison OR probation service be seen to be effective? Critically examine measures used and explore alternatives. The theory behind imprisonment is to isolate the wrong-doer from the society as the person can be harmful and dangerous to other people, and also stop him from enjoying civil liberties, thus enhancing the sense of deprivation and lack of freedom as a punishment to deter him from repeating the crime in the future. Although this may sound an ideal way to deal with criminals, the ground realities are quite different from the expected results. As no solution is perfect and without flaws, the same goes with this problem of handling criminal behaviour and controlling uncivil citizens, thus increasing problems inside the prisons and penitentiaries. Imprisonment and jailing has been an effective way to protect the society from corrupt people and individuals with criminal tendencies (Baker, 2002). Prisons hold a complete new world inside them as the most dangerous people from all over the country or province/state are collected in a single space, the chances of different mishaps and unwanted happenings are increased a hundred fold (Baker, 2002). Therefore, the prison service or probation service should be capable of handling such situations. Furthermore, the prison service should competent enough to prevent any incidents from happening at all. Containing any undesirable situations, preventing jailbreaks, controlling prisoner riots, thwarting murder attempts and violent attacks, halting drug trafficking, preventing any sexual harassment or assaults and frustrating any prison gangs from causing any harms are the primary tasks of a prison service. Further duties include the training of convicts to become a better citizen of society, provide them with adult education (if required), providing proper healthcare without any discrimination of race, class, colour, religion or creed and building the capacity of inmates to integrate with the society after they have completed their sentence (Great Britain Home Office, 1979). Education can be used for rehabilitation of prisoners. It is important to make them stand back on their feet and help them become a productive member of the society. Prisons serve this essential function in the society as well. This essay will attempt to shed a light on the present prison services, their current state, the methodologies which are used, and their competency and provide further alternatives and recommendations to increase their performance and capabilities. It will also comment on education and how it can play a role in rehabilitation of prisoners. Theory behind Imprisonment: Bjerregaard and Lizotte (1995) concluded that there are actually four theories that formed the idea of incarcerating certain citizens. These can be listed as under: Punishment Deter Specifically Deter Generally Rehabilitation. Punishment: This is a very basic idea which follows the concept of punishing an individual for his/her wrong doing and preventing him/her from repeating the crime. Deter Specifically: Also known as incapacitation, the idea behind specific deterrence is to remove the criminal individual from the society, relying simply on the idea that if such a person would not be a part of the society, his/her criminal actions would not affect the society in any way whatsoever and population in general will stay safe (Cao, Zhao, & Van Dine, 1997). Deter Generally: This involves making someone an example for a serious crimes (Carlson, 2001). For instance, if there is death penalty for intentional homicide, then lesser people will do any such act. This idea has given way to many harsh punishments such as life imprisonments and capital punishments. Rehabilitation: Rehabilitation involves guiding the offenders and making them better citizens of the society (Jiang & Fisher-Giorlando, 2002). They are given education and awareness about being a productive member of the community and participating in building the society instead of tearing it down. Although this is the most productive way of dealing with offenders, many criminal minds refuse to co-operate. Many convicts, several classes of sex offenders (especially paedophiles) and criminals with psychiatric disorders do not respond to such methods, leaving incapacitation and general deterrence as the only options (Howell, Egley, & Gleason, 2002). These theories might sound ideal on paper but applying them on the ground is completely different. These theories seem to fail at many points, there are many negative effects of holding someone in a prison, and these will be discussed in detail in further sections of this essay. Other alternatives must be applied in order to keep order within the prison system and the society. Present Condition of Prisons and Prison Services in the UK: (According to statistics of 2012, United Kingdom houses 87,668 people behind bars (Morris, 2012).These inmates are divided among many types of prisons which are present in the UK. These include: Local Prisons Trainer Prisons Open (Category D) Prisons High Security Estate Private (Contracted Out) Prisons Young Offender Establishments (YOI) Juvenile Establishments Women’s Prisons. The prisons in UK provide a lot of benefits and privileges to their inmates. However, these privileges are dependent upon certain guidelines which are provided to the inmates when they enter prison to serve their sentence. Hygiene, Exercise, Laundry, Food and Entertainment are handled by the prison service. Inmates are freely allowed to profess their religion and practise it accordingly. Drugs are discouraged and strict inmates suffer strict repercussions if they are found possessing drugs (Great Britain Home Office, 1979). Instances of Prisoner Abuse: The present conditions of prisons around the world vary according to countries and states. There have been countless reported incidents of prisoner abuse and torture, either by the prison authorities or by fellow-prisoners. These incidents include physical torture, sexual abuse and psychological torture (Miller & Decker 2001). Physical Torture: This includes needless and unnecessary beatings, hitting, and corporal punishments. Painful restrains and prolonged painful positions are also regarded as physical torture. Sexual Abuse: This includes Forced intercourse, genital mutilation and other forms of sexual abuse. According to a research conducted in 2003, almost every 1 male prisoner in 5 prisoners is subject of sexual abuse in the United States. Almost same is the condition in European countries as well (e.g. DeLisi, 2003). Psychological Torture: This includes sleep deprivation, taunting, verbally abusing, keeping prisoners hungry for prolonged periods of times etc. With such incidents happening almost everyday around the world and in UK and Europe, a large overhaul in the system of prison service should be introduced (Great Britain Home Office, 1979). Prisoner abuse and torture is not only limited to United Kingdom. Other countries around the world are convicted of prisoner abuse accordingly (Li, Stanton, Pack, Harris, Cottrell, & Burns, 2002). Prisoner abuse is not limited to local convicts only as prisoners of war are often the target of worst prisoner abuse. There are many NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) which are focused on reporting and putting an end to incidents of prisoner abuse and enhancing the state of prisons, prisoners and prison service. Their reporting is usually based on hidden videos made inside prisons (leaked videos made by other officers or someone under cover in the prison) or accounts of former inmates of a particular prison (Miller & Decker 2001). NGOs are trying to make prison free of any kind of abuse but more effort is required on the part of the government. Steps Needed: The first thing which needs focus on is the reasons so as to why these incidents happen in the prisons. Is the prison staff really qualified enough to handle prisoners? What are the requirements through which the prison staffs is appointed? Is the prison service eligible to routine psychiatric checkups to keep a track of their record? Many such questions will be raised and attempted to be answered in the further sections of this paper. Use of Physical/ Psychological Torture and the issue of corrupt officers: Fischer (2001) argues that usually, use of physical and psychological torture against defenceless prisoners is used by the officers because of their own frustration and anger. This has been found by psychological studies performed after the cases of Abu Gharib and Bagram Airbase prisoner abuse and torture. When the soldiers were under constant stress and see their fellows die in front of them, and being unable to hit back the insurgents, they used to spill out their frustration on the prisoners they had on their disposal. A similar case was reported when British soldiers were filmed beating unarmed Iraqi children in the street with batons and mutilating one body as well. Such behaviour caused scandalous media portrayal and further studies were launched to identify and prevent any such behaviour in the military. However, only the military was focused in such researches and studies and the local policing was ignored to a greater extent (Esbensen & Huizinga, 1993). Unknown to any media attention, abuses behind bars were happening constantly. Such kind of prison service is not affective but destructive for the society. Absolute power often corrupts the prison service members as they seem accountable to no one. Many of the cases go unreported as they are covered up by fellow officers and prison staffs. Why do the prison officers succumb to such levels of inhumanity and cruelty? In 1971, social psychologist Philip Zimbardo attempted to find out how role play can influence a person. He was actually interested in finding out the effect of a given role on a person’s behaviour. The experiment was designed in such a way that randomly selected participants were given roles of prisoners and guards. Researchers were forced to stop when prisoners started to complain about the behaviour of prison guards (Fagan, 1989). In the words of the researcher “At the end of only six days we had to close down our mock prison because what we saw was frightening. It was no longer apparent to us or most of the subjects where they ended and the roles began” (Fagan, 1989). With such psychological studies at hands, it should be suggested that prison guards and officers should be monitored independently by a third party source to make sure that such incidents don’t happen, and if they do, they are reported directly to the governmental authorities. The concept of “absolute power” should be stripped from prison service members. They should know that they are accountable to a higher power – the State (Great Britain Home Office, 1979). Furthermore, it has been reported that many of the officers and staff at most detention centres are themselves involved in corruption and protect the gang leaders who are incarcerated in their prisons (e.g. Wooldredge, 1991). Such tendency leads towards widespread corruption within the prisoners as well. The solution for this is the same as stated before in this essay: There should be a third-party authority which should be responsible of looking over the prison service, with jurisdiction over the prison service to take action against them if they are reported of any transgression of their authority or break of their code-of-conduct. Awareness and education level in the prisoners: Most of the prisoners which come to prison are highly uneducated, most not even graduated secondary schools. Many of them are drop outs because of their unsocial behaviour and dysfunctional families. Such circumstances make it necessary to make them aware of their rights and duties to the state (Flanagan, 1983; Wooldredge, 1991). The bar-chart below shows the difference between adult population and prisoners and the difference of their education levels. The chart above shows complete illiteracy to be around 4% in the general population while nearly 18% in the Prison population. Illiteracy is also a problem in causing criminal behaviours as these prisoners are not accepted by the society (Allender & Marcell, 2003). An effective prison service will make sure to provide education to its prisoners as it would help more inmates to become a part of the society and gain respectable jobs when they complete their sentences. Providing education to prisoners will help them become more productive citizens of the society. Education might also prove useful in preventing re-offence of prisoners. Education will also reduce the violence in the prison system as it will make prisoners busy. Conclusion: From above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that stripping the sense of “absolute power” from prison service members, curbing gang culture and imparting awareness and education in the inmates can be three major breakthroughs in improving the Prison Service. The main purpose of the prison system should be kept in mind so that the harmful effects of control and power can be curbed. The purpose of prison system is to keep criminals away from the society but this does not mean that prisoners should be treated badly. Moreover education should also be given them so that they become productive members of the society. Reference List Baker, J et al. 2002. A solution to Prison Overcrowding and Recidivism. Maryland University Bjerregaard & Lizotte. 1995. Gun ownership and gang membership. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. Vol. 86, issue 1, pp. 37–58 Blumstein, Cohen, Roth, & Visher. 1986. Criminal Careers and Career Criminals. Washington: National Academy Press Cao, Zhao, & Dine. 1997. Prison disciplinary tickets: A test of the deprivation and importation models. Journal of Criminal Justice, 25 (2), pp. 103–111 Camp, Gaes, Langan, & Saylor. 2003. The influence of prisons on inmate misconduct. Justice Quarterly, Vol. 20 issue 3 Carlson. 2001. Prison interventions: Evolving strategies to control security threat groups. Corrections Management Quarterly, Vol. 5 issue 1, pp. 10–22 Dean & Lawless. 1989. Tests for detecting over dispersion in Poisson regression models. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 84, 406, pp. 467–472 DeLisi, Matt. 2001. Extreme career criminals. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 25(2), pp. 239–252 DeLisi, Matt. 2002. Not just a boy’s club: An empirical assessment of female career criminals. Women & Criminal Justice, 13, pp. 27–46 DeLisi, Matt. 2003. Criminal careers behind bars. Behavioural Sciences and the Law, 21, pp. 653–669 DeLisi, Matt., & Gatling, Jewel. 2003. Who pays for a life of crime? An empirical assessment of the assorted victimization costs posed by career criminals. Criminal Justice Studies, 16, pp. 283–293 Decker & Curry. 2002. Gangs, gang homicides, and gang loyalty: Organized crimes or disorganized criminals. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, pp. 343–352 Esbensen, F., Deschenes, P., & Winfree, Jr. 1999. Differences between gang girls and gang boys: Results from a multisite survey. Youth & Society, 31, pp. 27–53 Esbensen, F., & Huizinga, D. 1993. Gangs, drugs, and delinquency in a sample of urban youth. Criminology, 31, pp. 565–589 Esbensen, F., Huizinga, D., & Weiher, W. 1993. Gang and non-gang youth: Differences in explanatory factors. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 9(2), pp. 94–116 Fischer, R. 2001. Arizona Department of Corrections: Security Threat Group (STG) Program Evaluation. Washington: US Department of Justice Flanagan, J. 1983. Correlates of institutional misconduct among state prisoners. Criminology, Vol. 21, pp. 29–39 Great Britain Home Office. 1979. Inquiry into the United Kingdom Prison Services Morris, N. 2012. Not fit for purpose: crisis in Britain's prisons worsens. The Independent Read More