A Significance Of Rehabilitation Criminology Essay

This report attempts to explore the development of Rehabilitation System in United Kingdom since its first appearance into Parliamentary Acts until nowadays. It will be presented the history of rehabilitation based on Prison reforms and its significance and relation to society. The report aims to address objectively great changes that were made according to Parliamentary Acts, Reviews and Reports of Ministry of Justice along with writings of professionals who aimed to review its concept and analyse the usefulness and impact of the Offenders Rehabilitation Programmes. Furthermore, it will be provided the cogent of offering treatment to offenders in order to reduce recidivism, which will be followed by an evaluation and recommendations upon Rehabilitation System.

In the past, for many years it was believed that the proper punish for an offender had strictly to do with the violent attitude against him and torturing of his body, deportation or even death penalty. Nowadays, and after several prison reforms Justice comes across the term of Rehabilitation. To begin with, Michel Foucault stated in 1975 that “Rehabilitation procedure has more to do with discipline of the soul than the torturing of the body.” (Foucault and Sheridan, 1979) The word “rehabilitation” is defined as re-enabling and it has Latin roots as it comes from the term “rehabilitare”. The assumption of all these is that Justice System is not only obliged to keep the community safer by holding the offenders in prison but also preparing them, for several reasons, to re-join society, by practicing their mind, developing their skills and expanding their knowledge.

1.2 Significance of Rehabilitation

It is necessary to be mentioned the importance of Rehabilitation from either points of view, that of Justice and society and that of the prisoners. Later on, it will also be discussed the significant thesis of rehabilitation to the reduction of re-offending. Rehabilitation’s vital role is as it was mentioned above discipline of the mind. Through discipline, the offender will be able to be useful to society without being tempted to commit another crime. In addition to that, there are also going to be mentioned the programmes and techniques provided to the offenders, depending on the type of their offence and their needs. These needs can be categorized, as it has not always have to do with criminogenic factors as mental illness or any kind of addiction, but also survival into society matters as where to live or work or permanent health issues. Following the previous statement, this dissertation is going to include an exploration upon behavioural programmes, depending on the individuality of every offender.

1.3 Aims of Dissertation

Through a study upon Rehabilitation’s background from its roots since today, this dissertation aims to provide a wide briefing about rehabilitation system in United Kingdom. The sensitive correlation between society and prisoners can cause several problems to their in-between balance, and this is another issue that will be stated, by analysing the rehabilitation system’s impacts to both of them. A review upon behavioural programmes will be mentioned later on along with their significance to the offenders. They are also going to be examined the advantages and disadvantages of the current system and its development throughout years. In addition to that this dissertation aims to explore the type of the rehabilitation programme which has to be followed by any offender depending on the type of his offense, the time of his penalty, any drug or alcohol addiction who may has, his age and gender, if he or she belongs to a minority group and last but not least if he or she suffers from any mental disorder.

1.4 Overview of Content

As it was mentioned above, this dissertation tends to give a brief review of Rehabilitation System for prisoners in United Kingdom since its first appearance. A flashback to rehabilitation’s first concept and its idea of discipline will be made in order to be evaluated its importance to the Justice System. They are also going to be discussed historical figures that published their first thoughts upon Justice System, as it had to do with punishing and imprisonment. Their appearance was significant to social reforming and inclusion of Parliamentary Acts into Justice, in order to change the detention conditions of that time, along with the relation of rehabilitation to reducing crime. In addition to that it is going to be discussed the context of Rehabilitation in general and it’s aims, as it plays major role as well to the whole Justice System and several aspects of society. From the content of this dissertation they cannot be excluded the Parliamentary Acts that involved rehabilitation and their relation to the present one. As it was stated above this dissertation will include a review of the services provided depending on the needs of the prisoners, along with the types and categories of the current rehabilitation programmes, their affects and their prospects of development. A major part of the information given is provided through literature review upon reports, statistics and Acts of the Ministry of Justice, Home Office, House of Commons and the Government.

Chapter 2

History of Rehabilitation

2. History of Rehabilitation

This chapter is going to explore Rehabilitation’s System Background and History since the first appearance. It will be also examined the first Parliamentary Act which includes rehabilitation and the purposes of its concept. Finally it will be discussed the ‘Nothing Works’ debate.

2.1 Background

The state before the current concept of Rehabilitation, which has to do more with discipline of the mind, had different ways to deal with the offenders. Depending on the type of crime the prisoners were coming across tough punishment through which they could be tortured, deported or even face death penalty. It seems as if during the 17th Century the idea of discipline started to establish. It has to be mentioned that the concept of rehabilitation back then was received in order to be given to the offender a chance of fitting back to society. The purpose was to be offered a safer society as an offender could re-join it and be a useful member of it.

As it was mentioned above it was only in 1764 when Cesare Beccaria (b. 1738) expanded in his work the idea of Rehabilitation. When his book “On Crimes and Punishment” was published it was exposed a new chapter to Justice System as it had to do with the theme of imprisonment. By the time, his thoughts were mainly influenced by the new, by then, era of Enlightenment. Beccaria had several positions inside society, as he was a well-known philosopher, criminologist and jurist. It can be assumed that Cesare Beccaria was the first who gave in public the idea of rehabilitation with main purpose the discipline of mind and soul and expect as an outcome the reducing of re-offending, and offending is general, as the ex-offender could have the ability to expand his knowledge to others as well. To be more specific, the criminologist stated that “It is evident from the simple considerations already set out that the purpose of punishment is not that of tormenting or afflicting any sentient creature, nor of undoing a crime already committed. … The purpose, therefore, is nothing other than to prevent the offender from doing fresh harm to his fellows and to deter others from doing likewise.” (Beccaria, 2010)

In addition to that, a philosopher and social reformer of that time who wrote about the importance of punishment giving to the offender in accordance to the type of the crime committed was Jeremy Bentham (b. 1748). Bentham, who is also one of the founders of the theory of utilitarianism, published in 1811 his work “The rationale of punishment” through which he expressed his thoughts upon punishment. To be more specific, the philosopher stated that “…A punishment may be analogous to an offence, it is necessary that the crime should be attended with some striking characteristic circumstances, capable of being transferred upon the punishment. These characteristic circumstances will be different in different crimes.” (Beccaria, 2010)

2.2 Penitentiary Act

The philanthropist and prison reformer John Howard (b. 1726) published in 1774 his reports about the detention conditions of the offenders as he spend a year working as a sheriff and evidenced the situation himself. He also managed to visit other prisons as well in order to be sure of his findings, before the export of his reports. His findings led the justice system to include two more Acts which were dealing with the circumstances under which the offenders were held, and suggested the thesis of the State in order to provide prisons which could offer humane conditions of detention. Howard also mentioned that they had do be done changes as it had to do with the fees paid to the jailers, as in many occasions offenders were still held in prison even if they had complete their penalty because they were not able to pay them.

It was only in 1779 when the passage of Parliamentary Acts had been made and it was given the permission to begin the building of the first State Prisons, which would offer healthier living conditions to the prisoners. The above can be assumed as the first evidence of an attempt of a proper rehabilitation system in United Kingdom. Even though several actions took place after the Act, the construction of a prison was not be done until 1785, when the magistrate Sir George Onesiphorus Paul completed the first prison at Gloucester which was stated as a first prison model at that time as it was approaching every aspect of the prisoners needs. It was coming across the previous statements about a healthier environment, as it was consisted by separated cells, classification of prisoners depending on the type of their offence and it was also provided medical support.

Although the Penitentiary Act of 1779 has made a major point during the development of Justice System and Rehabilitation, as it brought massive changes to the System as they knew it by then, it is believed that it had affected it in many ways. According to the Cambridge’s Historical Journal, it was strongly believed that the basic reason of these Acts pass was the reducing of deportation. In other words, prisons had to be held, in order to keep the offenders there, without the state having the need to deport them. That statement could be valid, as after the construction of the prisons in England, several other countries followed the same path, for the same reasons.

2.3 Purposes of Rehabilitation

After the engagement of the Penitentiary Act, Justice System started to develop the concept of imprisonment as a path to rehabilitation. As it was mentioned above, imprisonment reduced deportation of offenders and that created several problems at that time to jailers, as the population of the prison started to increasing. However, the key concept of Rehabilitation was the reducing of re-offending as it was believed that by educating the offenders, they would re-join society with different habits. The main theme of Rehabilitation was at that point that it would be created a safer community, as ex-offenders would not make the same mistakes, be useful to society and stop other people as well from committing a crime. At this point it is more important to Justice to protect society rather than being easier to an offender to resettle in terms of fitting smoothly back to community.

However, as the years passing by the Justice System and Rehabilitation Services are keep developing in order to be updated to the needs of community. It has been already stated that the prison population started to increase. It seems as if that the same problem remained since today. At this point rehabilitation for prisoners in United Kingdom plays vital role, along with several changes that were made to the penalties of every offense, the system has to come up with new ways of avoiding prison overcrowding. Overpopulated prisons can be harmful to both bodies, to offenders and guards as well.

In addition to the above, the support to offenders who have complete their penalty towards community is important as in most of the cases the reason why they are committing the same crime again is strongly connected to the social exclusion they are facing. It can be difficult to some offenders to re-join society, and at this point it is a matter of great significance the rehabilitation services during imprisonment along with some time after release.

Rehabilitation Services are aiming to offer to the prisoners the appropriate support for every case individually. Apart from the Rehabilitation programmes which are being used and they will be discussed later on, they are provided to the offenders several other services in order to being able to re-join society. According to the report of “The House of Commons” for the Parliament, offenders are coming across many themes during Rehabilitation. Rehabilitation programmes are being included into the context of Rehabilitation services, as they are being part of the “Purposeful Activity” along with physical education and training, which aims to educate and train prisoners. One of the reasons why this System also targets to reduce reconviction rates is as mentioned above there is in exist the problem of overcrowding. This has a result the continuous transfer of the offenders to other prisons and that has a major affect to programmes, as the prisoners cannot receive a stable rehabilitation programme.

2.4 “Nothing Works” – “What Works?” Debate

From the background review of Rehabilitation cannot be excluded the “Nothing Works” – “What works?” debate which began in 1974 towards a Robert Martinson’s research. Even though this debate was made based upon the American Justice system it’s impact affected United Kingdom as well in terms of re-thinking its approach on that specific topic. After a long study Martinson stated that Rehabilitation System does not help in reducing re-offending. According to Martinson, they existed few programmes that were useful for the prisoners, but the overall outcome it was not the expected. The writer, who tried to give an explanation for the success in reducing recidivism stated, “Having entered this very serious caveat, I am bound to say that these data, involving over two hundred studies and hundreds of thousands of individuals as they do, are the best available and give us very little reason to hope that we have in fact found a sure way of reducing recidivism through rehabilitation. This is not to say that we found no instances of success or partial success; it is only to say that these instances have been isolated, producing no clear pattern to indicate the efficacy of any particular method or treatment.” (Lipton et al., 1975)

During the 1980s there was a significant turn of political views towards the Right and as the change of view towards the current -at the time- rehabilitation system was differentiated, there were some opinions that the system of justice should change the penalty severity according to the offence that was caused by each offender and this specific group of opinions was made renown as the “Just Desert” terminology. The application of penalties would be carried out in a way that as an example a murderer would receive the same harm as he had caused to the victim which would be death. That initiated the usage of boot camps and prison regimes in order to strike a “short, sharp shock” effect to the offenders. Martinson’s views were dictating that the majority of the funding should be focused towards the policing of communities with the use of CCTV, electronic tagging and alarms and invest less in the rehabilitation of offenders. The findings of Martinson were opposed by a number of academic staff with an example of Ross & Gendreau in 1979. Finally, Martinson pointed another important variable to the negative findings which was the poor research methodologies.

As every finding that is exhibited by a research, the findings of Martinson had a number of critics (Hollin, 1999). As the 1980s and 1990s were merged, a number of meta-analytic studies were published and started to show what actually worked in the process of reducing re-offending. These statistical techniques were utilized in order to review the results of a great number of primary studies and allowed the emergence of overall trends in the accumulated data. Such trends were analysed by A. Andrews and J. Bonta (Andrews and Bonta, 2010) who claimed that the findings of Martinson and his colleagues were inconclusive as they were rushed into publicity without thorough research. Due to this significant claim, Martinson and his colleagues were deemed unreliable. In the beginning, Andrews and Bonta claimed that negative results in the studies were accepted instantly and almost with no question. Moreover, they supported the idea that the way the research was carried out was to mainly stress any supporting researches to treatment by using pseudoscientific techniques such as “stressing the criterion problem”, “discounting the underlying theory” and “contaminating the treatment”. This group of techniques were described under the general term “Treatment Destruction” (Gottfredson, 1979 ) . Furthermore, Andrews and Banta claimed that Martinson and his colleagues modified the measurements to their advantage and as a result they published findings that were unreliable. According to Andrews and Bonta, there were also errors in the conceptualization of the research as a whole which meant that measurements were unreliable and is a possibility that it caused the absence of positive results.

To sum up, everything that was mentioned in the course of this chapter is a review upon the development of rehabilitation until the end of the 1990s. Martinson and his colleagues presented the results of their research which specified that the effects of rehabilitation are absent and dictated that the justice system should introduce a model of penalising that would treat the offenders with severity that would vary depending on their offence. On the other hand, there were a number of opposed critics that accused them for being unreliable during the process of conducting their research and modifying the variables to their advantage.

Chapter 3

Current Rehabilitation System

In the UK

3. Current rehabilitation system in the UK

In this chapter are going to be provided the modifications and additions that were made to the rehabilitation system since the beginning of the 2000s and the way they formed the system as we know it nowadays.

3.1 “Prison Rules”

The “Prison Rules” of 1999 essentially were a replacement of the rules of 1964 and conducted changes to the way of managing prisons which include the treatment of prisoners, the powers and duties of boards of visitors and the conduct of prison officers. This chapter will mainly focus on the prison rules that affect the prisoners and not the visitors or any other mentions. The new rules of 1999 are a set of changes to previous rules in order to bring them to modern standards. The prison rule 32 is an addition to the rule 29 of the 1964 rules which was made in order to provide the distance learning ability to the prisoners as the 1964 rule was only mentioning in-prison learning programmes. Additionally, under the rule 41 every inmate search should not be placed under the sight of a person of the opposite search. Moreover, the newly specified rule 51, dictated that any irregularities during a visit such as the providing of drugs and articles to the prisoners, should be punished and the term “in any way offends against good order and discipline” has been revoked. Finally, the rule 55 commanded that additional punishment shall not be added to a caution and 14 days of cellular confinement is the maximum days of a total award. Additionally, the Secretary of State has been given the power to order a specific set of guidelines for the punishment of a prisoner. To conclude, according to Iain Crow the rule 2 of the prison rules states that “At all times the treatment of prisoners shall be such as to encourage their self-respect and a sense of personal responsibility” (Crow, 2001).

3.2 Social Exclusion Unit Report of 2002

As it was mentioned above, the target of rehabilitation is to reduce re-offending. Another report that played an important role to the modification of the justice system was the “Social Exclusion Unit Report” which was introduced in order to reduce the increasing rates of re-offending by ex-convicts and was commissioned by the Government in order to investigate what steps should be followed as to halt offending repetition. It also dictated that efforts for the rehabilitation of prisoners should be doubled in order to introduce them back to society effectively and it would be done by prison sentences not being made only to punish but also provide the convicts with the opportunity to reduce the chance of re-offending. Moreover, the Unit Report of 2002 stated that offenders are repeating offences because the prison sentences were not as effective as they should be.

A number of reasons for the increment of reconviction rates during the 1990s included the erosion to the system of support for short-term prisoners’ post-release, the changes to the prisoners’ benefit rules and the steep growth in areas that are defined by social exclusion such as inequality, child poverty and drug use. The report also introduced a series of key factors that affect the re-offending rates which are the mental and physical welfare, the education and employment of prisoners, the misuse of addictive substances (i.e. alcohol, drugs), the family networks and the life skills and financial support of prisoners.

The Social Exclusion Unit Report of 2002 not only stated the factors that cause the rise in re-offending rates but also made a number of recommendations which are the following:

A long-term National Rehabilitation Strategy should be introduced in order to approach rehabilitation and ultimately reduce re-offending.

Imprisonment should be applied only where necessary. Improvements to diversion schemes have to be made in-court in order to identify if an offender is mentally ill and specific actions should then be carried out such as mental health care. Additionally, there should be doubt over the overall value of short-term prison sentences as they might have negative effects recrudesce due to the lack of supervision after custody.

Housing and financial needs of newly released prisoners should be taken into account a national level. Furthermore, in order to further improve the accessibility to healthcare, housing, employment and education, a system for effective resettlement should be designed.

An increase in the variety of programmes that are available in the community is needed, as it will help with a number of aspects of the ex-prisoners such as mental health programmes, drug and alcohol treatment and education.

Each ex-prisoner should be treated in accordance to their circumstances and as a result if would offer a much improved effect to the rehabilitation of the ex-prisoners as each programme will be focused on their needs. These programmes will include a series of activities and support that will be devised by a case manager who will cover the entire sentence of the prisoner, during and after his or her imprisonment.

In conclusion, the Social Exclusion Unit Report of 2002 stated a lot of problems in the rehabilitation progress that was used until that time but also recommended key objectives that had to be fulfilled in order to improve the rehabilitation system and significantly reduce the re-offending rates for ex-prisoners and is best defined by “the best way of reducing re-offending is to ensure that prisoners on their release have the ability to get into work and a home to go to. In the remainder of this report, we investigate the current levels of provision of training, education and employment opportunities within prison, and of resettlement arrangements after release.” (Office, 2002)

3.3 The Carter Report of 2003

In March 2003 the Government authorized the businessman Patrick Carter in order to create an extensive review of the criminal justice system in England and Wales. The objective was to establish an effective system that would not only focus on reducing crime but also maintain the public confidence alongside being affordable.

The Carter Report was released to public in December 2003 that concluded that the increased usage of imprisonment and probation during the past decade reflected the increased severity of the sentences for specific offences rather than an increase in the overall seriousness of crimes that were brought to justice or the growth of the number of offenders being caught and sentenced -both remaining widely constant. Moreover, the Carter Report stated that while imprisonment is vital in order to protect the public, by incapacitating dangerous and persistent offenders, the increased use of imprisonment and probation has only a limited effect on offences and the evidence -which prove that the severity of sentences is a major factor for preventing crimes- are also severely limited. Another problem in the process of convicting offenders was pointed out by the report which described the process too focused on offenders with no previous sentences and failed to get to grips with highly persistent offenders. Additionally, the report stated that there were a lot systemic failures in the use of interventions in order to reduce re-offending because they were ineffectively targeted. These failures that were highlighted were the fact that short-term offenders are not staying in the same place and as a result can’t receive effective interventions which would reduce the chance of re-offending, the quality of the interventions that an offender is receiving varies greatly depending the prison establishment who is held and as the court often is not able to address the needs of the offender is being assigned with interventions that are not suited for his or her needs.

The Carter Report alongside the problems -which stated that existed in the criminal justice system- it introduced a number of new approaches that should be followed in order to deal properly with offenders with the core points being:

A National Offender Management Service (NOMS) should be established that would combine the functions of the present Prison and Probation Services and it should have two main core goals with the first being the punishment of offenders and the reduction of re-offending. It should be headed by a lone Chief Executive and based on evidence on what works in reducing re-offending and taking no account of whether the offender is sentenced with imprisonment or community service, it should be responsible for the successful management of the offender’s sentence.

A range of targeted and effective sentences should be created which will be enforced in robust way. Depending on the risk assessment of each offender, community punishments should become more intense and three levels of severity should be made available (Community Punishment, Intensive Supervision and Monitoring and Community Rehabilitation). Last but not least, community sentences for low-risk cases should be replaced with fines.

Based on sentencing guidelines, which are informed by evidence of what works in reducing re-offending and makes effective use of the existing capacity, the judiciary should take up a new role in managing probation demand and prisons and as a result ensure a better consistency of punishment practice.

As the findings of the Carter Report were very significant, the Government drew heavily on its recommendation that were focused on the improvement of the criminal justice system and the particular correctional services. As a result the Government started the implementation of the core proposals from the Carter Report into the Criminal Justice Act of 2003.

Chapter 4

Offending Behaviour Programmes (OBPs)

4. Offending Behaviour Programmes (OBPs)

A major part of Rehabilitation procedure is the establishing of Offending Behaviour Programmes that were designed in order to treat or improve the cognitive skills of the offenders and expect as an outcome the reducing of re-offending. These programmes were designed and offered to prisoners by the Prison Service during the early 90’s. This chapter will include several models of these programmes, as they are being categorized according to the type of the offence, the condition of the offender along with his psychological condition, his age or any addictions.

4.1 Psychological and Behaviour Issues

Grendon’s model is one of the most knows rehabilitation programmes in United Kingdom, as it was first established 40 years ago at the HMP of Grendon in Buckinghamshire. This programme aims to offer a treatment to offenders who suffer from psychopathy. At this point it has to be mentioned that the offenders volunteer to participate and they cannot be over 40. When the offenders are getting involved with Grendon’s system, are being divided into five groups, which are also known as ‘therapeutic communities’. Grendon’s model is still offers treatment to the offenders despite the lack of funding.

Another behaviour programme that aims to provide treatment to offenders with psychological issues is Democratic TC, which has several similarities to that of Grendon’s. This programme is designed to support offenders who suffer from either personality disorder or emotional needs. In order to address any psychological and emotional agitation, Democratic TCs offer round-the-clock ‘living-learning interventions’ for offenders whose primary criminogenic contingency factors should be targeted. In addition to the previous, it has to be stated that in several models, which are based on cognitive skills, some mentors of the interventions are offenders who have already completed the programme successfully. Such is ‘Kainos’ Rehabilitation programme, which is also known as ‘Challenge to change’. ‘Kainos’ is also a full time based model and aims to reduce criminogenic causes of offenders who have been judged as medium to high risked.

Behavioural programmes are also targeting to reduce re-offending through teaching the criminals to control themselves by improving their self-management skills. Such model is ‘Priestley One to One (Priestley OTO)’, which also aims to provide the offenders with the skill self-critic. In this case they are able to be responsible and understand the already committed crime and accept its consequences. It has to be mentioned that this programme is bounded only in community. Additionally, a widely known model is TSP, which stands for Thinking Skills Programme and works upon teach the offenders to achieve their goals without committing offences. In other words, it is based on self-management and personal coaching. Same target also has RESPOND, which is designed for prisoners who cannot work in groups, and offers the treatment individually.

4.2 Drug and Alcohol Misuse

Eighty per cent of people that are being imprisoned have significant issues that are related to either drug or alcohol. In a number of prisons, drug tests were carried out during reception and eight out of ten prisoners were found having class A drugs in their system. Drug misusers are committing a major proportion of the acquisitive crimes as, in drug tests that were carried out during reception, a good per cent of the offenders that were prosecuted for offences such as burglary and shoplifting had heroin, cocaine or other opiates in their system. The underlying problem is that most of these people have never received any help about their drug problem. The statistics stated that there is a need for programmes that will help prisoners, not only during their imprisonment but also after their release, to detoxify and to manage with their drug misusage.

There are several programmes that help with the prisoners to deal with their drug addictions during their imprisonment. The primary programme that was developed in order to help the prisoners is the Counseling, Assessment, Referral, Advice and Throughcare (CARAT) Services. The CARAT programme is essentially a low-intensity, non-clinical drug addiction intervention service. In order to help prisoners who have a moderate to severe drug addiction, the Intensive Treatment Programmes were designed but they are not as widely used as only 60 out of the 139 prisons of the prisons estate included such programmes.

Another programme that was developed for use in areas with high crime rates was the Criminal Justice Interventions Programme (CJIP) and was conducted by Drug Action Teams. The aim of the programme is to redirect the offenders away from crime and towards treatment by the coordination of drug treatment and criminal justice agencies. The interventions that are available through the CJIP include Enhanced Arrest Referral for drug misusing offenders into treatment and are conducted by drug workers in custody suites for testing of cocaine and other opiates that are testing the relation between treatment conditions and “trigger” offences.

Due to the rise of alcohol-related crime the Government developed a number of programmes that would treat offender who misuse alcohol or are addicted to it. A programme that was created is the Offender Substance Abuse Programme (OSAP) which addresses alcohol or drugs misuse with the usage of cognitive methods that are trying to change the attitude of offenders in order to prevent the relapse and as a result reduce re-offending. A similar programme that was introduced is the FOCUS Substance Misuse Programme which linked the addiction of offenders to substances to their offending behavior. Another programme that was developed is the Low Intensity Alcohol Programme (LIAP) which was developed in order to provide the so-much-needed motivation which alcohol-misusing offenders need in order to stay clear of alcohol and prevent relapse.

The number of programmes is increased with the addition of the Alcohol Related Violence Programme (ARV) which is an alcohol programme that is focused on the reduction of offending of an alcohol related violent nature. It is designed for hazardous drinkers that are under imprisonment for alcohol related offences. The aim of the programme is to tackle the thoughts of offenders about the relation of violence and drinking.

An addition to the number of available programmes is the Rehabilitation of Addicted Prisoners Trust (RAPT) programme which also includes the Alcohol Dependency Treatment Programme (ADTP). These programmes are based on Drug & Alcohol interventions which aim to point out the loss of control that happens to an individual that is addicted to substances and the resulted offences that are caused by that loss. It promotes the commitment to change by gaining the support of a power of a higher order and it follows the 12 step NA fellowship programme.

One more addition is the Control of Violence and Anger in Impulsive Drinkers (COVAID) programme which is a series of programmes that are biased towards the reduction of anger and violence in drinkers. The variations of the COVAID programme can be offered on a one-to-one basis or as a groupwork. It can be carried out in both secure and community settings and the goal of these programmes is to reduce re-offending of young men with a repetitive history of violence while under alcohol intoxication.

Finally, another programme is the Prison Partnership Twelve Step Programme (PPTSP) which is an alcohol and drug high intensity programme that uses interventions and is focused on the loss of control during intoxication of an individual due to substances use. The goal of this programme is the promotion of commitment to change with the support of a power of a higher order. The programme also makes use of pro-social models that are linked to Alcoholic Anonymous, Fellowships of Narcotics and Cocaine Anonymous.

4.3 Sex-Related Offending

In order to reduce the sex and violence related offences, the Government has introduced a number of programmes that are focused on not only the reduction of these crimes but also the reduction the crimes being carried out again by the offenders. A programme that is related to sex offending is the Sex Offender Treatment Programmes (SOTP) which is offered to sex offenders in accordance to the needs and the risk level of each offender. There is also the Extended SOTP which is biased towards the high risk men who have completed successfully the targets of the Core programme treatments and the main areas that it covers are the relapse prevention, emotional regulation, the recognition and modification of patterns of dysfunctional thinking and the emotional regulation of sex offenders.

Another programme that is used in the rehabilitation of sex offenders is the Adapted Sex Offender Treatment Programme – Community Version (ASOTP-CV) which is similar to SOTP but is specifically adapted for usage on offenders that have learning or social issues. It is essentially developed to modify offence-justifying thinking, increase sexual knowledge, develop ability to recognize feelings, develop prevention of relapse skills and the identification and understanding of victim harm.

An additional programme which is helping sex offenders to understand the reasons behind their offences is the Sex Offenders Treatment Programme (SOTP Core). The main aspect of this programme is to offer the offenders ability to practice new behavioural skills and practice new thinking alongside developing meaningful life goals. The programme also aims towards the development of victim harm awareness.

The sex offences that are carried out by offenders using Internet as their means of getting to the people that they want to harm have been increasing rapidly and as a result the Government introduced the Internet Sex Offender Treatment Programme (I-SOTP) which is focused on the exploration and confrontation of feelings, thoughts and beliefs of each internet sex offender. The main aspect of this programme is to reduce the possibility of re-offending alongside the understanding of the harm that the offenders are doing to the victims and other people around them.

One more programme that is focused on sex offending is the Community Sex Offenders Group Programme (C-SOGP) and it helps the sex offenders to understand the harm that they are causing to the victims and others around them and also helps the sex offenders in the process of staying away from offending by developing behavioural skills, practicing new thinking and developing meaningful life goals. There are some variants of the C-SOGP that are distinguished based on the area that they are applied. These programmes include the Northumbria Sex Offenders Group Programme (NSOGP) and the Thames Valley Sex Offenders Group Programme (TVSOGP).

4.4 Violence-Related Offending

As the violent-related offenders are increasing in number, the Government introduced a series of programmes that would help offenders to take control of their anger or other issues which are causing the use of violence. One of these programmes is the Aggression Replacement Training (ART) that makes use of challenges that are aimed towards the acceptance of the responsibility of their actions and their consequences. It also promotes the understanding of the harm that the offenders are causing to their victims. As a result public offences, criminal damage and incidences of assault are reduced while the public protection is increased.

Another programme that is utilized in order to reduce violent-related offences is the Self Changing Programme (SCP) that is focused on the reduction of violent outbreaks in offenders of high risk and repetitive violent offences. This is achieved by targeting the anti-social thinking and the violent-supported beliefs of the offenders.

An addition to the series of programmes is the Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it (CALM) programme that is utilized on offenders that are lead to the usage of violence due to intense emotions. Understanding the factors that are causing their anger, which leads to violent outbreaks, is of major importance as It will lead to the managing of their emotions.

One more programme that is applied to violent offenders is the Chromis programme which is developed in order to address the issues of offenders that face problems in the acceptance of treatment because of their psychopathic nature and the disrupts that it causes.

Last but not least, the Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme is targeted towards men that have repeatedly committed violent behaviour while being in an intimate relationship. During the course of the programme, offenders are being presented with alternative techniques that will help them reduce their violent outbreaks and will provide them with the skills that are needed in order to develop a non-abusive and healthy relationship.

4.5 Programmes for Female and Young Prisoners

It was March of 2004 when the Government addressed all the criticism that it had received due to the failure to fulfill the needs of the female population that was imprisoned. The new programme was called the Women’s Offending Reduction Programme which was essentially a multi-agency plan of action towards the delivery of a joined coordination in order to address the needs of female offenders. The main plan of action is biased towards the training, communication and the offer of guidance to the imprisoned women. The sole purpose of the programme is: “to reduce women’s offending and the number of women in custody, by providing a better-tailored and more appropriate response to the particular factors which have an impact on why women offend. The intention is not to give women offenders’ preferential treatment but to achieve equality of treatment and access to provision.” (Home Office, 2004)

A programme that was created under the Women’s Offending Reduction Programme is The Women’s Programme which is essentially focused on the acquisitive crimes that women offenders have committed and are on the verge of conviction for not violent-related offences. The programme specifies on the importance of the understanding that women offenders have upon problems in their lives and how they react to them. As a result women can develop means of dealing with their problems effectively.

An additional programme that was introduced is the Choices, Actions, Relationships and Emotions (CARE) which is targeted to female offenders whose crimes are related to the difficulties that they face with the regulation of their emotions and helps the offenders to identify their emotions and develop specific skills that will help them to manage their emotions. Moreover, the programme is also focused on the development of self-identity of a positive nature that will enable them to live the life they would like to live after their release.

Alongside the programmes that were designed for women, the Government introduced programmes that were specifically developed for young prisoners in order to help them prevent relapse to criminal actions after their release and on to the rest of their adult lives. Young prisoners are the prisoners of age 15 to 21 years and are categorized into juveniles whose age is between 15 and 17 years and young adults who are of 18 to 21 years of age. The vast majority of young prisoners have been subjects to a great number of abuses of both physical and mental nature such as parental neglect, substance misuse, physical and mental health issues and poor attendance to educational programmes. A programme that was developed with young prisoners in mind is the Detention and Training Order (DTO) programme. It is the essential programme that is used in juvenile prisons and the average length of time that a prisoner has to attend is the DTO is 41/2 months but depending on the crime that was committed by each prisoner a continuation to adult prisons for the remainder of the sentence is carried out. Moreover, the Intensive Supervision and Surveillance Programmes (ISSPs) were introduced for highly persistent young offenders whose age is below 18 years. Finally, the Juvenile Estate Thinking Skills (JETS) programme is based on the TSP model explained earlier but is modified in order to be used on groups of juvenile prisoners of age between 14 and 17 years and is aimed towards the understanding of the behaviour behind offending.

4.6 Programmes for Short-Term Prisoners

The majority of crimes in the UK are committed by short-term prisoners which are defined as prisoners whose sentence is less than 12 months. Although the re-offending percentage of these offenders is very high, the Government has still to develop programmes that will help offenders to prevent the relapse into criminal activity after their release. The main justification that the Government is promoting is that short-term offenders don’t spend the required amount of time in prison which is needed in order for the existing rehabilitation programmes -which are available to prisoners with sentences longer than 12 months- to have any effects to them. When the lack of resettlement services -which support them after their release- and the lack of attention paid to them during their imprisonment are added, the result is a vicious circle in which the offenders are repeating offences and are ending back to prison during a short time after their release. This circle was pointed out in the Halliday Report of 2001 (Halliday Report, 2001). The problems of the rehabilitation system about re-offending short-term prisoners were also highlighted in the Social Exclusion Unit Report which stated that the “majority of prisoners, particularly those serving short-term sentences, receive little practical support, before release or afterwards” (Social Exclusion Unit Report, 2002).

A successful model for rehabilitation of short-term prisoners is the Kent and Medway Short-term Prisoner Project which is a voluntary model which started its operation in 2002 and is not only targeted to the break of the re-offending circle but also support the prisoners after release by providing housing and -in some cases- arranging job interviews.

4.7 Resettlement Programmes

Resettlement to society is a very important factor in the process of rehabilitation and the reduction of re-offending rates. The importance of the existence of such programmes was stated by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) in 2002 which stated that “the three key factors to reducing re-offending are work, accommodation and family support” (Committee Of Public Accounts, 2002). It also stated that the forty per cent of the prisoners were homeless after their release and the same percentage applied to prisoners that lost contact with friends and family during the course of their sentence. In addition, the Home Office pointed out that when an offender is being employed after his release the risk of re-offending is significantly reduced (Home Office, 1996).

A successful programme that is utilized in order to help prisoners in their effort to re-join society successfully, is the Focus on Resettlement (FOR) programme which arms the prisoners with the much needed confidence and motivation which they will need in order to kick-start their lives after their release. This programme is only available when in custody and is developed for prisoners with sentences of up to 4 years.

As history has proven many times, social services and community support agencies are not active enough towards the release of a prisoner. Most of the ex-prisoners have trouble when trying to get access to benefits and housing due to their past while they also face a number of obstacles when trying to engage in drug or learning programmes.

To sum up, the Government has introduced a great variety of programmes that help prisoners to reduce and prevent the relapse into criminal activity after their release. There a lot of successful programmes but there are still a lot to be desired from the Government especially in the field of short-term prisoners and their high risk of re-offending.

Chapter 5

Evaluation of Rehabilitation System

5. Evaluation of Rehabilitation System

This chapter will discuss the evaluation of the Rehabilitation Programmes and their impact and effectiveness to prisoners and their behaviour after resettlement. They are going to be included the controversies of the System provided from Prison Services along with the advantages and disadvantages of Programme Delivery to the offenders, their responsivity and the future which is expected.

5.1 Controversies upon OBP’s

It is not possible for any innovation in a system which is reforming to not come across any kind of criticism, and that is a significant part as without it it would not be possible to develop each topic. Especially in a theme such as Rehabilitation and prison reforming, any accurate commendatory articles could be more than useful in helping the treatment methods improve and have a successful impact to the prisoners. Even a debate between professionals can be characterized as productive if they are both aiming to make reforms in terms of improving the current system. On the other hand, according to E.J. Palmer, they can be several examples through which can be made invalid arguments by professionals upon a new reform through a political ‘game-playing’ or a moment of ‘personal innuendo’. As it was mentioned above it is vital for implications in Rehabilitation System to exist a healthy critique of the programmes in order to be succeeded the best in terms of prison reforming.

The evaluation of rehabilitation programmes and system can be tough as they have to be characterized according to their impact to the offenders, what these programmes have to offer to them and finally to observe their effectiveness on the key point of this programmes which is the reducing of re-offending. In order to evaluate them it has to be done a deep research to their first moment of interacting with the prisoners, as it is vital to be chosen an appropriate and accredited programme that can completely fit the current statement of the offender. It has to be mentioned though the significant role which is played by the evaluation of the offender by the Police Services in order to receive a treatment appropriate to his needs, as individuality is the reason of the existence of all accredited behavioural programmes.

Friendship et al. made a significant report in 2003, which tried to suggest a four-element procedure to be used in the evaluation process in order to calculate the effectiveness of the accredited programmes. According to Friendship it is important the environment of the organization which take place the programme, as it related to its delivery and can have several affections to the offenders. In addition to that, before the programme procedure it is necessary to be measured the principle and the accuracy of that model depending on the conditions of the prisoner. Friendship also mentioned the economical cost of the treatment as the accredited programmes are still part of the Prison Services which belongs to the public sector and it is binding to be completed the programme successfully. Finally, it is crucial to be an observation of the short and long term results of the model followed as it is strictly connected to it general effectiveness to the offender.

They have been written many reports of the success of the Rehabilitation programmes and their success in terms of their completion. They also exist reports, which are mentioning the non-completion of these programmes. There is an issue of offenders who are not succeed in completing the model and this is an accredited disadvantage of the System. They may be several reasons of the dropping of these sessions, as they can fail it or they cannot fit in these groups in order to achieve their goals. As it was mentioned previously it is vital to be matched the appropriate model to the offender with respect to individuality. It has been reported that it is expected in a low rate that some of the participants will not terminate the treatment, and in most cases that happens to offenders who have a background in dropping out any group sessions as they may have left school or any kind of employment. It has to be mentioned though that these offenders are being evaluated before their involve in a correctional treatment and their rates in committing a crime again are much higher than from the others.

Gendreau came up in 1999 with nine organizational factors which are capable of providing a successful completion of the programmes. Gendreau stated that is vital for services development to be up to date and taking new initiatives. In addition to that it is important that these initiatives have to be developed into the appropriate correctional models. In some cases it can be useful for the system to have an easy response towards prisoners who facing problems. It is significant though that these problems should be solved in frame of a specific time in order to run the programme correctly. The resolution of these matters should be under a non-aggressive situation.

Continuing the characteristics of the appropriate correctional treatment, it is necessary to be provided a safe environment to the staff without being mixed any emotional battles. It is important for the programmes to keep the staff changing in order to be avoided any personal interpretations. For a successful teaching, stuff should be trained and be up to date in an annual basis. Last but not least it is recommended that the services should be related to institutions which providing educational, practicing and medical support for guidance. (Gendreau et al., 1999b)

5.2 Responsivity of OBP’s

As it was previously stated the delivery of the correctional treatment has advantages along with disadvantages. In several case the offender cannot be categorized in an appropriate for him programme because his needs may vary from the services provided and he cannot come across the one that fits him. Additionally, it has to be mentioned that a failure of an offender to complete a programme it has not always to do with lack in finding the treatment which responds to his criminogenic factors, but instead in having issues of responsivity.

In most correctional treatments the procedure is based on groupwork programmes. Every offender it can differs from the other due to learning skills problems and that can be the reason of completion’s failure. A prisoner may face literacy issues and that can affect his participation in a programme. In addition to that, vital role in a group work plays the behaviour of every participant, which can be problematic, in terms of causing difficulties and affect the smooth running of the session. This can reduce the potential of each offender individually to participate. On another point of view it has to be stated the important role that plays the training which is received by the staff who’s delivering the programmes. The staff should be accredited with the appropriate knowledge in order to co operate with the offenders, and be able to manage them along with the ability to point out any issues of the participant, from problematic behaviour to any appearance of medical matters or mental illness.

The willingness of the prisoners to receive the treatment is also a matter of discussion as it has great impact on his behaviour inside the programme. It is important to be included to the evaluation of the offender the address of his readiness upon changing and follow the behavioural programme in order to be educated, improve his skill or any other changes can make depending on his needs and the accredited model. To be more specific, Ward et al, noted in his work “The person is motivated (i.e., wants to, has the will to), is able to respond to appropriately (i.e., perceives he or she can), finds it relevant and meaningful (i.e., can engage), and has the capacities (i.e., is able to) to successfully enter the treatment programme.”(Stith et al., 2004b) The writer also mentioned the ‘internal readiness conditions’, which are based on each offender’s individual characteristics depending in their will to change. Though, it has to be stated that overcrowding in prisons does not help in any way the expected outcome of the programmes, as there is a huge amount of participants and prisoners can affect each other with their own behaviour.

Another important issue that should be mentioned is the consideration of the effectiveness of the rehabilitation programmes towards most of the offenders, including minorities which are facing discrimination problems. Despite the separation between the treatment models based upon the needs of the prisoners according to their offense, it is significant that all of them can be able to participate, without facing exclusion because of their age, gender, ethnic group or religion. Wormith and Olver made a statement that concludes the meaning of responsivity. “To summarize this perspective, the means by which responsivity may affect outcome is by being sensitive to offender characteristics so that the design and delivery of services are more likely to engage the client, increase treatment completion, augment the acquisition of rehabilitative material, and reduce recidivism” (Wormith and Olver, 2002)

5.3 Future in Rehabilitation System

It can be said that they are being made several attempts from the side of Justice and Prison Services in terms of developing rehabilitation system. Especially the last decade several changes were made to the system in a frame of a ‘team effort’. One major step was the reviewing of the sentencing, as it was vital for prisons to reduce the amount of offenders, by changing the sentences for small offences to working hours in community or by paying fines. This offers to prisons the advantage of working more with the offenders. It has to be stated though that overcrowding still remains a significant problem.

It is important that the Justice System along with political figures are keep attempting to provide a better rehabilitation and resettlement programme and expect as a result the reducing of recidivism and re-offending. It seems as if the design of NOMS by Patrick Carter, opened a new era in terms of Rehabilitation Services. The target is still the same; the re-joining of ex-offenders to society with the chance to find a work and a home and follow a more lawful life. The Government is trying to offer to the prisoners the opportunity of a second chance, but in order to be the programme successful it is still needed the development and the funding.

It is necessary to be made a whole research for each offender in terms of his background, type of offence or any addictions that may have in order to be provided with the appropriate training and treatment to him. It is vital for the system to come across and accord with the several types of their needs that vary, especially for offenders who have limited access to the programmes because of discrimination. These offenders they mostly belong to ethnic minorities or another oppositions.

There are several changes that have to be made during the next years in order to be achieved a better rehabilitation system with more up to date programmes which will provide the best results to offenders, firstly through prison and secondly through community. Community programmes are also significant to the smooth re-joining of society, as it is expected to be needed also the help of Services after the offender’s release to society. Major importance also has every resettlement programme in order to be ensured the safety of the society towards the responsibility of the ex-offender.

Home Office’s report is suggesting to the current Prison and Probation System some binding changes they have to be made. First of all, it is cogent for the rehabilitation programmes to equip the prisons with work-like establishments inside the prisons. Secondly, they have to be added to the system amplifications to the offender treatments designed for short-term prisoners. It is vital as it was mentioned above, to be reinforced the whole treatment model for prisoners who are facing problems with alcohol and drug misuse or any other addictions. Another adjustment has to be added in terms of medical examination of offenders. This is significant for their treatment as it can be found any mental disorder or other health issues who may be important to consider. Last but not least, as it mentioned previously, is the notice of additional considerations for offenders coming from minority groups.

Chapter 6

Conclusion

6. Conclusion

To sum up, this report aimed to discuss the significance of Rehabilitation System for prisoners in United Kingdom. Its target was to explore one of the most important aspects of Justice and Prison System. Based on literature review, researches and reports it has been made a provision of rehabilitation’s background history and it has been stated that even though its presence in Parliament counts more than two hundred years, is still developing and reforming according to the political and social system. During this report they have been mentioned several prison reforms influenced from each generation and social structure of its time. In this report there have been noted major works which were used in reforming, from the start of its concept during 17th Century until nowadays.

In addition to that it has already be mentioned that although the several prison reforms that have been done, the target of Rehabilitation was and still is the reducing of recidivism and re-offending. The point of this Service though, is to offer to the prisoner a chance to re-join society and be useful to it by working and live a lawful life. However, this Service also aims by its correctional treatments the provision of a safer society. In an ideal community ex-criminals would not only gain a normal life back, but also they would spread their treatment in terms of teaching other people as well before they would commit the offense. Despite that fact, it can be said that according to other reports rehabilitation has great impact to most of the prisoners who complete their treatment and rates of re-offending have been reduced but there are still many sectors that have to be improved.

The analysis of the Offenders Behavioural Programmes, which were mentioned previously, it was evidence that Justice System is making a huge effort upon Rehabilitation and Resettlement of the Prisoners. As it has been already stated one basic principles of the design of the correctional models is that every offender has different needs. At this point it has to be noted that even though there are several programmes which are capable of treating most of the offender’s conditions depending on them, there is still work it needs to be developed for a system who tends to offer equal opportunities to them.

As in every cogent debate as Rehabilitation, it is expected to receive many critiques for several aspects of it, either by appointing correct characteristics and helping to the development of the theme or by misjudging it. This report attempted to provide an objective view of Rehabilitation System by mentioning its advantages and disadvantages as well, along with recommendations given either from public and Justice sectors or researchers and professionals. With respect to society and provision of a safer community ‘Prison Rules’ (1999) conclude in two lines the usefulness of rehabilitation “The purpose of the training and treatment of convicted prisoners shall be to encourage and assist them to lead a good and useful life” (Loucks, 1999)