dealing with offending behaviour

aims of custodial sentencing

Custodial sentencing involves a convicted offender spending time in prison or another closed institution such as a young offender's institute or a psychiatric hospital. There are four main reasons for doing this:

1. deterrence - This works on two levels: general deterrence- aims to send a broad message to society that criminal behaviour will not be tolerated and individual deterrence- aims to stop the individual from repeating the same (or other) crimes to avoid going back to prison. So puts the offender off offending again, and also puts off other potential offenders.

2. incapacitation - To deprive an individual of their freedom so they are taken out of society to prevent them from reoffending as, so they are no longer a threat to the public. Putting offenders such as violent offenders or sex offenders into prison for example means they no longer pose a threat to society.

3. rehabilitation - To make the offender into a better person in order to reduce the chance of reoffending. Prison should provide opportunities to develop skills and training or to access treatment programmes for problems such as drug addiction. as well as giving the offender a chance to reflect on their offending behaviour. Offenders should leave prison better adjusted and ready to be effective members of society.

4. retribution - This is the notion that offenders should pay for their actions and is a way for society to seek revenge/get their own back. Putting them in prison means that they are suffering the consequences of their criminal behaviour which ultimately is the loss of their freedom.

evaluation of custodial sentencing

1. recidivism rates - One of the arguments against using custodial sentencing as a deterrent and as rehabilitation is the recidivism rates. The UK has some of the highest recidivism rates in the world with 2014 figures showing 45.5% of offenders will reoffending within one year of release and this is even higher at 69.9% for juvenile offenders suggesting prison is only an individual deterrent for some and does not rehabilitate a large proportion of prisoners. If you look at reoffending rates for those serving less than 12 months (57.7% re-offend within a year in 2020) it also questions the use of custodial sentencing as retribution and incapacitation for shorter sentences. Shorter sentences are for crimes such as drunken disorderly and minor drug offences, so retribution and incapacitation doesn’t seem relevant here as they are neither dangerous criminal who are a threat to society or crimes that the public need to “seek revenge” for. This suggest that for minor crimes like these a different approach is needed than custodial sentencing.

2. effectiveness of rehabilitation - One of the main arguments for the use of custodial sentencing is rehabilitation. Some skills-based training such as anger management, reducing drug addiction and social skills training are successful. However, the House of Commons Education Committee’s inquiry (2020) found a long-term decline in both the quality of education and the number of prisoners participating in learning or training. Evidence for this is that in 2020 OFSTED reported that 2/3’s of institutions showed poor management of education and skills and 14/23 institutions visited were deemed as inadequate or requiring improvement suggesting rehabilitation is becoming less likely when in prison. This decline can be blamed on the nearly 25% cuts to prison services since 2011 but with governments promising to invest 550 million over the next 3 years to specifically rehabilitate offenders maybe this is set to improve

3. psychological effects - Another argument against custodial sentencing is the negative psychology effects. Rather than rehabilitating people, the figures suggest that prison causes psychological problems such as depression, anxiety and self-harm and that these may continue when the person leaves prison. Suicide rates are considerably higher in prison (3.7 times for men in 2019) than in the general population, as are incidents of self-mutilation and self-harm. Furthermore, the risk of suicide is greater in the first 30 days suggesting that adjusting to prison life is evidently too psychologically distressing for some inmates (Crighton & Towl, 2008) Some may see this as retribution for the crimes committed but if these effects last after prison, then custodial sentencing does not rehabiliate and may contribute to reoffending and recidivism rates so reduce individual deterrent

4. for some prisoners but not all - Custodial sentencing does provide a method of punishment that the legal system can administer and for violent and dangerous criminals that do pose a threat to the public then it serves the purpose of incapacitating them. Ministry of Justice figures (2022) show that 61% of current prisoners had committed a non-violent offence however and most women in prison do not need to be there with over half of the receptions into prison are of women on remand and a third are of women serving short sentences (appg 2019) so when evaluating the aims of custodial sentencing the individual person, background and crime they committed needs to be considered first

the psychological effects of custodial sentencing

Research has revealed several psychological effects associated with serving time in prison:

• Brutalisation – prison acts as school for crime, reinforces a criminal lifestyle and criminal norms, leads to high recidivism rates, approx 70% of young offenders re-offend within 2 years.

• Psychological problems/disorders are higher in prison populations, eg Suicide rates are considerably higher in prison than in the general population (3.7 times higher for men) as are incidents of self-mutilation and self-harm. Furthermore, the risk of suicide is greater in the first 30 days suggesting that adjusting to prison life is evidently too psychologically distressing for some inmates (Crighton 2008)

• Labelling -leads to loss of social contacts, reduced employability, all affecting recidivism rates.

• Institutionalisation – leads to lack of autonomy, conformity to roles and a dependency culture, it also leads to recidivism. Inmates may have become so used to the norms and routines of the prison that they are no longer able to function in the outside world.

-BUT positive psychological resulting from treatment, rehabilitation, remorse

evaluation of the psychological effects of custodial sentencing

1. causation - One of the issues with looking at the psychological effect of custodial sentencing in causation. It is difficult to show that the psychological problems are due to effects of imprisonment as the psychiatric problems may have been there before being institutionalised. The chief inspector of prisons report 2020 supports this as when looking at 469 male and female prisoners found that 42% of them had been previously diagnosed with a mental illness such as anxiety (27%), PTSD (20%). However, even if psychological issues were pre-existing, custodial sentencing will surely only make these worse and the fact that suicide in men in 3.7 more times higher in prison than in the community supports this fact and allows the ability to say that custodial sentencing can cause negative psychological effects in some and exacerbate them in others

2. alternatives - Alternatives to custodial sentencing then may be better for low-risk offenders if all of these negative psychological effects are a possibility. Community sentencing would avoid the psychological problems associated with prison all together and avoid labelling by allowing the offender to maintain their employment and social contacts. It also (when necessary) involves drug/alcohol treatment and therapy so allows rehabilitation but in the community. Ministry of Justice figures (2022) show that 61% of current prisoners had committed a non-violent offence and with such high levels of recidivism (57.7%) for those serving less than 12 months community sentencing may be much more beneficial however would not be suitable for all offenders especially those who have committed violent or sexual criminal acts.

3. individual differences (women) - Ministry of Justice data (2019) showed that over half the women in prison reported experiencing emotional, physical, or sexual abuse as a child and 57% reported having been the victims of domestic violence as adults. It is claimed that the prison system which is designed around the needs of a male majority with the rules and policies compounds these problems (appg 2019) evidenced by HMIP (2021) which reported that self-harm rates are five times higher than rates for men. This then shows us that the negative psychological effects of custodial sentencing are greater for women than men.

4. individual differences (neurodivergence) - For neurodiverse prisoners many elements of the prison environment can cause psychological distress, including busy and noisy wings, cell sharing and changes to the daily routine and Talbot (2008) found that those with learning difficulties were 3x more likely to have clinically significant anxiety and depression than the rest of the prison population. This evidence shows that for vulnerable groups these psychological effects are even more pronounced. However, others may not be as affected; the length of sentence, the reason for incarceration and previous experience of prison may all be important factors. Therefore, it is difficult to make general conclusions that apply to every prison and every prisoner. Different prisons have different regimes so there are likely to be wide variations in experience

5. crime prevention - Crime prevention is seen to be a way of avoiding the psychological effect of custodial sentencing all together. Crime prevention strategies such as community prevention, situational prevention, and early childhood intervention are examples and as 50% of incoming prisoners are being identified as having a neurodiversity then the early identification and support of this along with the other strategies avoids the labelling and negative consequences of prison for these people whilst being better all round for society in general (Harrower 2001)

recidivism

Recidivism means the tendency for convicted criminal to reoffend. Recidivism rates in the UK are high at 45.5% for adults reoffending within a year (2014) 69% for juveniles within a year(2014) and 57.7% for those who have served less than 12 months (2020) which suggests that custodial sentencing in neither an individual deterrent for most offenders, particularly for the young that those who have committed minor crimes and suggests it is also not rehabilitating these offenders.

However, these figures may not be totally accurate as some reoffences will go undetected or will never reach court. Therefore, although rates are thought to be high, the numbers are inaccurate and will probably be even higher.

Having said that recidivism figures do appear to be falling in the UK with the rate for proven offending in 2021 dropping to 25.6%. but remaining high for more minor sentences.

evaluation of recidivism

1. psychological effects - One reason for recidivism is the psychological effects of custodial sentencing. The likelihood of reoffending can be increased if an inmate's mental health is unstable. This could be prompted by the prison situation or research suggests that 42% of prisoners had a mental health condition before entering prison. Poor mental health, especially addiction disorders, is related to crime rates so if the problem is not treated successfully in prison, it could make an offender vulnerable to reoffending. Research by Coid supports that as found that 26 offenders who had treatment for mental health issues were 60% less likely to re-offend. This issue not only highlights the importance of effective rehabilitation programmes in prisons, but it also raises questions as to whether custodial sentencing is the appropriate way of dealing with individuals with mental health issue

2. alternatives to custodial sentencing to reduce rates - The high recidivism rates especially for shorter sentences questions the use of custodial sentencing. If poor mental health is made worst in prisons and other effects of prisons such as institutionalisation, make prison seem more appealing to some offenders than the outside world or brutalisation meaning that prison acts as a school for crime making reoffending more likely then to reduce recidivism, alternatives may be needed. 61% of people in prison have not committed a violent crime and with Sherman (2007) finding that alternatives like restorative justice actually reducing reoffending (11% reoffending rates for those who had carried out restorative justice compared to 37% of those that didn’t). It suggests in order to reduce recidivism we need to reduce custodial sentencing for those who are non-violent.

3. external factors - Recidivism rates may be due to the 'outside world' rather than theprison so until societal problems such as poverty and lack of support for mental health are addressed, it is likely recidivism will remain high. There is a significant lack of research into how these factors affect recidivism as most research is centered on the prison rather than the post-release environment. Therefore, in order to truly understand why inmates go on to reoffend and how this can be prevented, more emphasis must be placed on investigating post-release factors.

behaviour modification in custody - token economy

Behavioural therapy is based on the principles of operant conditioning. It should not be used to control undesirable behaviours as this is incompatible with rehabilitative goals but is for the reinforcement of desired behaviours only.

Token economy aims to reinforce desirable behaviour in offenders with a token that can be exchanged for some kind of reward. The reward is the primary reinforcer and the token acts as a secondary reinforcer. This is because the token's value comes from their association with the reward (primary reinforcer).

Examples of desirable behaviours in a prison could include – avoiding conflict, following prison rules, keeping one's cell orderly, etc. Prisoners are given a token each time they perform a desirable behaviour.

Examples of rewards could include – a phone call to a loved one, time in the gym or exercise yard, extra cigarettes or food

how the programme is developed and managed

1. Setting overall goals/aims in which offenders probable future lifestyle should be taken into account.

2. These goals should be initially agreed by prisoners, officers, administrators and reviewed periodically

3. The goals should be objective, measurable and broken down to constitute a chain of progression between the offender’s present behaviour and the level of desired behaviour.

4. Tokens (secondary reinforcers) are given for agreed desirable behaviour. Tokens are exchanged for primary reinforcers, mostly being consumable-tobacco, sweets, food

anger management

The aim of anger management is not to prevent anger but to recognise it and manage it. It has been suggested that cognitive factors trigger the emotional arousal which generally precedes aggressive acts therefore anger management programmes consist of the individual being taught how to recognise when they are getting angry/losing control and then they are encouraged to develop techniques which bring about conflict resolution without the need for violence. Anger management is a form of CBT.

3 stages in anger management

1. cognitive preparation - A trained therapist would help a person to reflect on past experiences in order to understand the specific triggers/cues that precipitate their anger, such as somebody looking at them or their partner. They would then learn to interpret these triggers/events as irrational as responding with violence would be if somebody was to just look at you. So, by redefining the situation as non-threatening, the therapist is attempting to break what may well be an automatic response for the offender.

2. skill acquisition - Offenders are introduced to a range of techniques and skills to help them deal with anger- provoking situations more rationally and effectively. Cognitive- such as positive self-talk to encourage calmness e.g., teaching a mantra or positive self-statements such as “I am calm and relaxed.” Behavioural- for example assertiveness training to help a person communicate more effectively to avoid violence. Physiological- methods of relaxation and/or meditation (e.g., breathing deeply and counting to 10) to promote the idea that it is possible to control their emotions.

3. application practice - Offenders are given the opportunity to practice their skills and techniques using role play within a carefully controlled environment so they can get used to using self-control and not get provoked by their triggers. It is likely to involve the offender and therapist re-enacting scenarios from the offender’s past which have involved escalated feelings of anger and acts of violence. The therapist would give constructive feedback on the person’s performance. The offender may also practice these skills through the week and keep a diary of how they have acted in anger provoking situations.

evaluation of behaviour modification (token economy and anger management)

1. research (behaviour modification) - Hobbs and Holt (1976) introduced a token economy programme with groups of young delinquents across three behavioural units. They found a significant difference in positive behaviour compared to the non-token economy group. Allyon et al (1979) found a similar effect with offenders in an adult prison. This demonstrates the effectiveness of behaviour modification as a way of dealing with offending behaviour and so adds support for token economy as a way of modifying behaviour in prisons.

2. research (anger management) - Hughes (1993) evaluation of an anger management program with a group of violent males in a Canadian Federal Prison who received weekly two hour cognitive-behavioural approach aner management sessions compared with 27 offenders who received no treatment. Findings revealed that although overall recidivism was relatively high (61 percent), completion of the program was associated with significantly lower recidivism involving violent crime. In addition, the length of time in the community before rearrest was significantly lower for those who completed the program than for those who did not. Findings provide support for anger management

3. cost and ease - One strength of behaviour modification over Anger management is cost and ease of delivery which is an important factor considering the large budget cuts and cuts in prison staff over the last 10 years. Anger management requires a trained CBT therapist to carry out which has been an issue in terms of not just the cost but the availability in prisons. Whereas Token economy is relatively easy to carry out and administer. It can be set and is carried out by everybody that comes into contact with the offender and so requires no specialist therapist. So, in terms of ease to carry out and costs incurred behaviour modification is a better option for prisons and is a reasonably easy way of dealing with offending behaviour.

4. effectiveness - One strength of Anger management over token economy is overall effectiveness of the programmes. Anger management takes into consideration the complexity of offending behaviour as it attempts to address the cognitive, behavioural, physiological, and social factors involved so addresses and changes the thoughts associated with the behaviour and so offers skills that can be used outside of the prison setting. Whereas token economy is only tackling the superficial surface behaviour in a controlled environment and so is likely that any positive changes in behaviour occurring whilst the offender is in prison may be lost when they are released as the 'outside' desirable or law-abiding behaviour is not always reinforced. Therefore, anger management is overall a more effective and life enhancing way of dealing with offending behaviour than TEP which only changes behaviour and not the thinking behind it

restorative justice programmes

Restorative justice programmes switch the emphasis from the needs of the state (to enforce the law and punish) to the needs of the victim or victims (to come to terms with the crime and move on). It typically involves offenders coming face-to-face with the victim or victims.

Restorative justice programmes can function as an alternative to custodial sentencing (especially if the offender is young), as an 'add-on' to community service or in addition to a custodial sentence

The restorative justice process:

• Offender meeting survivor for several supervised sessions with a trained mediatior.

• Survivor explaining the impact of the crime on them.

• This allows the offender to see the consequences of their actions.

• It encourages empathy for the survivor from the offender.

• It empowers the survivor and promotes healing.

• Offender provides some kind of retribution to victim/survivor.

• Rehabilitation through collaboration and reconciliation

evaluation of restorative justice programmes

1. reduces recidivism - Sherman & Strang (2007) reviewed 20 studies, involving 142 men convicted of violence and property offences, who had taken part in restorative justice, only 11% reoffended, compared to 37% of a matched control group so is a strength of restorative justice as is evidence it may positively impact on reoffending. Therefore, it could be used as an alternative to custodial sentencing

2. cost-effectiveness - Shapland (2007) concluded that every £1 spent on restorative justice would save the government £8 through reduced re-offending as demonstrated by Sherman and Strang (2007). However, there are costs involved in training mediators and high dropout rates from offenders unable to face their victims, so it may not always be cost effective

3. suitability to all criminals - Offenders must feel genuine remorse and actively engage in the process; therefore, restorative justice is not suitable for all criminals or indeed all crimes. It only works where there is an obvious victim whereas corporate fraud or money laundering for example do not have one and so restorative justice would not be appropriate. Women's Aid have called for a ban on the use of restorative justice in cases of domestic abuse for example as they believe it is inappropriate. Therefore, the fact that restorative justice isn’t suitable for all offenders is a weakness

4. individual differences in effectiveness - Restorative justice is most effective for young, first-time offenders. It provides a short, sharp shock and forces them to face up to the consequences of their actions so there may be individual differences in the effectiveness of it