8.10: Conclusion

Last updated
Save as PDF

Page ID: 81872

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \) \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)\(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)\(\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

It is imperative that the conversation regarding truth in sentencing from the length of a sentence to the actual crime committed and the crimes sentences for are examined more closely and honestly. As an example a rapist may be permitted to plea to an assault rather than the actual rape. This may be permitted for housing and safety issues surrounding a prisoner or expediting court proceeding. Overall examination of sentencing in order to achieve a stated goal requires alteration of more basic conversation such as, what will work to change the behavior of an inmate. Incarceration reform requires stretching the imagination and reaching beyond the cookie cutter methodology currently applied and society’s willingness to call that good. The ADOC operates a correctional system that adequately protects the public from the dangers of offenders, while balancing reentry needs and providing competent reentry programming. PA DOCS has committed to restating treatment measures by housing sex offenders in specific facilities in order to receive concentrated therapy and undergo testing in order to design the treatment plan specific to the offender. Also embedded in this assumption is that sex offenders will not be cataloged under illness with one treatment plan.

This is further echoed by Bartol & Bartol (2008) in which they contend that “a forensic psychiatric treatment community would be more suitable because it is evident that only therapeutic community treatment is effective in juveniles who are severely impaired, abused and neglected. Treatment of such juveniles should take place explicitly (at least in the initial phase) away from the influence of abusive, chaotic family and friends, even when these people are willing to change their attitudes” (p. 272). Such programs are multisystemic therapy (MST) programs which are intensive family and community based treatment for juveniles with antisocial behavior and mental health issues (Bartol & Bartol, 2008).

Finally the reality of it is that not all offenders can be saved and we as a society must accept that fact and have secure facilities for those who do not yield to treatment!