Canadian Corrections and Psychodynamic Theories

1. Chapter 4 Overview: Canadian Corrections

• Introduction: Focus on Canadian Corrections in Practice.

• Learning Outcomes:

  1. Introduce critical statistics and facts on incarceration.

  2. Describe a typical day for an incarcerated person.

  3. Evaluate risk factors and assessment methods for public safety and rehabilitation.

  4. Analyze sentencing, punishment, and restorative justice models.

  5. Critique contemporary rehabilitative approaches.

  6. Review future directions for correctional research and practice.

2. Chapter 4: What's Ahead (EBP Focus)

• Evidence-Based Practice (EBP): Discussion of EBP in corrections, analyzing and guiding real-world applications.

• EBP Foundation & Assessment Points:

  • Exploration of EBP foundation in Canada.

  • Examination of assessment at key decision-making points.

  • Focus on specific applications, like custody classification.

  • Discussion of risk assessment and management strategies.

  • Analysis of effective/ineffective models for reducing criminal conduct.

3. Background Information: Crime Reduction Debate

• Crime Reduction Debate: Ongoing debate in Canada comparing the effectiveness of increased rehabilitation versus greater punishment in reducing crime.

• Key Questions:

  • Which approach yields better correctional outcomes?

  • Do all justice-impacted individuals benefit equally from rehabilitation?

  • Are there instances where certain programs may worsen behavior?

  • New Critical Thinking Question: How do systemic factors (e.g., poverty, discrimination, intergenerational trauma) influence the efficacy of rehabilitation versus punishment, particularly for marginalized groups?

  • New Critical Thinking Question: What ethical considerations arise when evaluating correctional programs, especially regarding potential negative impacts on certain individuals or communities?

  • New Critical Thinking Question: How can correctional policies effectively balance public safety with long-term goals of reintegration and address the root causes of criminal behavior?

4. Social Learning Theories & CBT

• Application in Corrections: Those with cognitive components are well-supported and highly relevant for correctional interventions.

• Limitations of Standard CBTs: Standard Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) programs alone are proving insufficient.

  • Third Wave CBTs are emerging.

  • Legislation and policies are needed to remove structural barriers to maximize program effectiveness.

5. Critical Statistics (LO 4.1): Correctional Supervision in Canada

• Between April 1, 2019, and March 2020: Canada had $133,616$ individuals under correctional supervision.

• Jurisdictional Breakdown:

  • Provincial/Territorial: 64.8 \text{%} in community settings, 17.9 \text{%} in custody.

  • Federal: 10.3 \text{%} in custody, 7 \text{%} in community settings.

6. Population Changes in Incarceration

• Although incarcerated populations have been stable or decreasing over the last decade, specific groups have seen increases:

  • Indigenous individuals: Up 40.8 \text{%} from $2010/2011$ to $2019/2020$. Recent/Relevant Information: Recent reports from the Office of the Correctional Investigator continue to highlight the severe overrepresentation of Indigenous individuals in federal custody, emphasizing the urgent need for culturally responsive interventions and systemic changes.

  • Black individuals: Increased slightly from 7.8 \text{%} in $2015/2016$ to 8.1 \text{%} in $2019-2020$.

7. What Happens When Someone Goes to Prison (LO 4.2)

• Overview: A detailed look into the legal proceedings, intake processes, and daily life of an incarcerated person in Canada.

8. Pre-Trial & Intake

• Pre-Trial (Example): For serious crimes, an individual would likely remain in jail on remand until trial.

• Initial Assessments: During intake, assessed by corrections and healthcare staff for security reasons (e.g., incompatibles, escape risk, gang affiliation) and health issues (e.g., physical care needs, mental health concerns, self-harm risk).

9. Plea Bargain & Sentencing

• Prevalence of Plea Bargains: Approximately 90 \text{%} of cases are resolved through plea bargaining rather than trial.

• Reception Prison Intake: If a plea bargain is accepted, transfer to a reception prison within a month. Involves reviews for custodial and health concerns, with mental health issues referred to psychiatric professionals.

10. Six-Week Intake Process

• Interviews: Conducted by various staff.

• Custody Classification: Determining security level.

• Correctional Plan: Addressing criminogenic needs and programming.

• Risk Assessment: Determining risk level and appropriate program dosage.

11. Rights & Release Eligibility

• Handbook: Incarcerated individuals receive a handbook outlining their rights.

• Eligibility Dates: Includes dates for discretionary release (day parole, full parole) and legislative release (Statutory Release, Warrant Expiry).

12. Custody & Parole Progression

• Security Reassessment: If initially in medium or maximum security, parole officers reassess eligibility for lower security after a year using a standardized risk measure.

• Parole Officer's Role: Regularly reviews progress on the correctional plan and writes reports for parole applications.

13. Day Parole & Post-Release

• Day Parole: May be granted to live in a halfway house for 3-6 months before returning to the community.

  • Conditions: Avoiding criminal peers, abstaining from drugs, seeking employment, participation in aftercare.

• Post-Release Supervision: After completing a sentence, individuals return to the community without supervision conditions.

• Supervision Failure Rates: Between $2015/16$ and $2019/20$, about 10-38 \text{%} of individuals under federal community supervision fail to complete due to technical violations or new crimes.

14. A Day in the Life: Incarcerated Person

• Daily Schedule (Medium or Maximum Security):

  • $6:45$ AM: Count (must be up and dressed).

  • $7:00$ AM: Breakfast.

  • $8:00$ AM: Go to program, work, or return to cell.

  • $11:45$ AM: Return to cell for count and lunch.

  • $1:00$ PM: Go to program, work, or return to cell.

  • $4:30$ PM: Return to cell for count and supper.

  • $6:00$ PM: Go to recreation, cultural events, self-help groups.

  • $10:30$ PM: Count.

  • $11:00$ PM: Lock-up and lights out.

15. Assessment Approaches: Factors of Criminal Conduct (LO 4.3)

• Risk Factors: A characteristic (personal, social, environmental, psychological) that increases the likelihood of committing a crime.

• Recidivism: The recurrence of criminal behavior after a sentence or community release.

  • Specifically, general recidivism (any new offense or technical violation).

16. Effect Size (Cohen's d)

• Definition: Standardized mean difference between recidivists and non-recidivists for a given characteristic.

• Quantifying Impact:

  • $.20$: Small effect.

  • $.50$: Medium effect.

  • $.80$ and higher: Large effect.

17. Static Risk Factors

• Definition: Historical, generally unchanging variables, typically grouped into demographic and criminal history.

• Demographic: Young age, single marital status, and being male are associated with increased general recidivism. Being a member of a BIPOC community has inconsistent associations.

• Socioeconomic Status (SES): Low SES rates were insignificant, possibly because many in the justice system already experience low SES.

• Criminal History: Youth and adult criminal history have a medium effect size with recidivism.

18. Dynamic Risk Factors

• Definition: Potentially changeable social and psychological variables.

• Strongest Predictors of General Recidivism: Pro-criminal attitudes, antisocial peers, antisocial personality/psychopathy, employment/education, and substance use.

• Other Significant Effects: Small but significant effects from family/marital issues, financial problems, and housing concerns.

• Weak/Inconsistent Associations: Clinical variables like low intellectual ability, personal distress, and psychosis.

19. Types of Dynamic Variables

• Stable Dynamic Variables: Enduring characteristics that change gradually (e.g., job skills, education status), usually requiring intervention.

• Acute Dynamic Variables: Variables that change rapidly (e.g., emotional distress, substance intoxication), often influencing immediate behavior.

20. Protective Factors

• Definition: Variables linked to positive, non-criminal outcomes (e.g., desisting from crime, securing employment, prosocial relationships).

• Importance: Crucial for successful release and reintegration.

• Historical Context: Historically, not clearly defined or distinguished from risk factors.

21. Structured Assessment of Protective Factors (SAPROF)

• Development: Improved identification and assessment of protective factors.

• 17-Item Measure: Evaluates protective factors in three domains:

  • Internal characteristics: Intelligence, empathy, self-control, coping.

  • Motivational factors: Prosocial leisure, work, treatment motivation, positive attitudes toward authority.

  • External factors: Support networks, intimate relationships, stable living accommodations.

• Research & Application: Higher SAPROF scores correlate with lower recidivism. Used alongside risk assessments to highlight strengths and aid in risk reduction.

22. Risk Assessment: Primary Goal & RNR Model

• Primary Goal: Guide services to prevent recidivism by tailoring interventions based on individual risk level.

• Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Model: Identifies:

  • Risk: Risk level (to determine service intensity).

  • Need: Dynamic risk factors (to target treatment).

  • Responsivity: Individual factors (to customize intervention approaches).

23. Risk Tools & Classification

• Risk Tool: A collection of risk items (static and/or dynamic), defined in measurable terms, with numeric scaling, used to generate an overall risk level (not the same as a risk assessment).

• Selection Factors: Accuracy, cost (purchase price, time, training), type of information used (static vs. dynamic, interviews).

• Specialized Instruments: Crucial for specific offenses/outcomes (e.g., sexual violence).

24. Four Types of Risk Assessment Approaches

• Unstructured Clinical Judgment: Relies on the assessor’s subjective decisions.

• Empirical Actuarial Instruments: Strict rules, numerical scoring, linked scores to recidivism rates.

• Mechanical Tools: Structured rules for combining factors, but do not provide recidivism tables.

• Structured Professional Judgment (SPJ): Blends clinical and actuarial approaches, allowing assessor discretion in weighing factors.

25. Bonta's (1996) Four Generations of Risk Assessment

• First Generation: Unstructured clinical judgment.

• Second Generation: Static actuarial measures.

• Third Generation: Actuarial analysis incorporating both static and dynamic factors.

• Fourth Generation: A comprehensive guide from intake to case closure involving static and dynamic factors, emphasizing assessment’s role in guiding interventions and measuring change.