weekfivediscussion1corrections

docx

School

Ashford University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

303

Subject

Sociology

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by rytrish81

Report
Hello Professor and Classmates, Explain how “mandatory release” and “supervised release” relate to social justice and criminal objectives. The concepts of mandatory release and supervised release are in alignment with the social justice goals established within the criminal justice system. Mandatory release ensures that individuals are not subjected to unnecessarily prolonged periods of incarceration, thereby promoting fairness and proportionality in sentencing. Similarly, supervised release places a paramount emphasis on rehabilitation and support, aiming to address the underlying causes of criminal behavior and significantly reduced recidivism rates. Both concepts uphold the principles of social justice and the pursuit of equal opportunities for all by fostering individual autonomy and the potential for positive change. Both also play a pivotal role in reducing mass incarceration rates. Discuss institutional goals that by be met by releasing incarcerated persons early to serve their remaining sentences within society. One of the key institutional goals of advance release is to address the issue of overcrowding in correctional facilities. The burden of prisons is reduced, enabling these institutions to operate within their capacity limits (Schrantz et al., 2018). In concert with mandatory release, supervised release provides continuous support and access to essential services for individuals, significantly reducing the likelihood of reoffending and contributing to an overall decrease in the prison population. Discuss pros and cons for privatizing corrections. Relate the pros and cons of privatization to at least one issue for the future of corrections. One of the primary arguments in favor of privatization is its potential for cost- effectiveness. Proponents argue that private companies can run correctional facilities more efficiently and at a lower cost compared to government-run prisons (Feeley, 2014). The privatization of corrections, however, raises significant ethical concerns. Critics argue that the profit-making nature of private companies may incentive cost-cutting measures that compromise the well-being and rights of incarcerated individuals (Feeley, 2014).
The impact of privatization on the quality of correctional facilities can have arguments made by both sides. Proponents claim that competition among private companies can drive innovation and result in better conditions within the facilities. Critics argue that profit-driven motives may cause private companies to prioritize cost-saving measures over the well-being of incarcerated individuals, leading to inferior living conditions and reduced access to essential services (Feeley, 2014). One issue that warrants attention is the use of technology. The concept of privatization in corrections entails both advantages and disadvantages that can significantly impact the implementation of technology-based rehabilitation programs. Private companies often possess greater financial resources and technological expertise, which allows them to develop and implement innovative technology-driven interventions that address the incarcerated individuals’ needs. On the other hand, the profit-driven nature of private companies raises concerns about the potential compromise in the delivery of evidence-based interventions and individualized treatment. It is of utmost importance to conduct careful evaluations and monitor the impact of privatization on the use of technology in rehabilitation to ensure the realization of potential benefits while effectively addressing ethical and quality-related concerns. Feeley, M. M. (2014).  The unconvincing case against private prisons Links to an external site. Indiana Law Journal 89 (4), 1401–1436. Retrieved from https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/. Schrantz, D., DeBor, S., & Mauer, M. (2018).  Decarceration strategies: How 5 states achieved substantial prison population reductions Links to an external site.  [Report]. Retrieved from https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/decarceration-strategies-5-states-achieved- substantial-prison-population-reductions/.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help