Community-Control Theory And Community Control Programs

930 Words 4 Pages
Community-Control Programs as Part of Deterrence The use of deterrence theory has also been applied to community-control programs, specifically during the reform of the correctional system that involved the abandonment of rehabilitation (Cullen & Jonson, 2017). The movement gained support from both conservatives and liberals for its ability to be both tough on offenders but also limit the number of people sent to prisons, which provided cost-savings (Cullen & Jonson, 2017). Community-control programs, also known as intermediate punishments, instilled that if offenders were rigorously supervised and under threat of punishment, they were less likely to recidivate (Cullen & Jonson, 2017). A number of programs were developed including intensive …show more content…
Findings of the study showed that ISPs do not control crime any better than routine supervision, nor were ISPs more effective in limiting recidivism when compared to clients in control groups (Petersilia & Turner, 1993). In addition, Petersilia & Turner (1993) came to the conclusion that it is hard to make an argument in favor of ISPs over prison because of its failure to control crime. ISPs were more effective at detecting technical violations during probation, but this was due to the intense monitoring of the offender during the sentence (Petersilia & Turner, 1993). This means ISPs fail to reduce prison overcrowding, nor do they save money. However, there was one silver lining within the study as evidence showed that when the program involved an element of treatment, recidivism was reduced (Petersilia & Turner, 1993). In total, the RAND study showed that ISPs centered on intense supervision and control have little impact on recidivism as it does little to deter …show more content…
As a result, it is unknown whether incapacitation works better than another strategy, such as a rehabilitation program. Instead, incapacitation effects compare an offender’s stay in prison to simply being free with no control. Thus, the research about incapacitation effects is inherently flawed, for it fails to reveal whether it works better then other possible intervention techniques (Cullen & Jonson, 2017). There is little reason to doubt whether an incapacitation effects exists, but whether it is the best course of action for reducing crime is still up for substantial debate. The correctional system simply needs more research comparing theories (Cullen & Jonson, 2017). Based on the evidence, the correctional system’s focus of getting tough on crime through retribution, deterrence, and incapacitation has produced discouraging results. While these theories will likely to continue to play a role in the system’s response to offenders, research has made it clear that alternatives such as rehabilitation offer more hope to reducing

Related Documents