In the corrections field competing intentions and/or goals often remain a contentious issue as what factor should be best addressed. Moving from a more outdated draconian form of retribution, corrections now balance their efforts between incapacitation and rehabilitation. Deterrence is also a minor factor resulting from the correctional goals. Modern corrections punitive treatment of offenders is justified for deterring others from engaging in criminal behaviour, however, the punishment of individuals is not necessarily useful in preventing recidivism (Edney, & Bagaric, 2007). A popular mode of rehabilitation has been the risk, need, responsivity model (RNR) in its attempt to reduce offender recidivism. An alternative GLM approach asserts downfalls
…show more content…
The risk principle in the RNR model posits that the likelihood of an offender is predictable (Andrews, 2001; Andrews & Bonta, 2006). The risk principle relates to the offenders need for intervention based on their risk level. High risk individuals require more intense levels of intervention compared to low risk individuals. Low risk offenders are more likely to reoffend if they are treated along with high risk criminals. Therefore, minimal intervention is given to low risk offenders (Warren, 2007). The need principle relates to criminogenic needs; the attitudes and behaviours that are conducive towards criminal behaviour. These factors that cause individuals to engage in criminal behaviour are therefore targeted by the treatment program. Finally, the responsivity principle is the mode of tailoring the treatment method to the offender’s abilities (Andrews, 2001; Andrews & Bonta, …show more content…
Proponents of the GLM suggest that it makes up for the RNR model being too punitive and risk focused, or that it is too controlling rather than focusing on the good in individuals. GLM is an approach that sees individuals from a humanistic approach that they are ultimately good. It is a strengths based approach. Andrews et al., (2011) suggests that GLM is an untested approach targeting non-criminogenic needs and therefore not reducing recidivism. Despite the proponents of GLM contesting the efficacy of RNR, RNR models do encapsulate the humanistic principles that are suggested it lacks (Andrews et al., 2011). Additionally, RNR methods have evolved over time to keep up with changes in research on what is deemed effective in reducing recidivism. All the while, identifying other humanistic aspects that can be targeted in treatment to provide greater moral treatment of offenders and ultimately less recidivism. Any effective aspects of the GLM are already encapsulated in the widely used RNR approach (Andrews et al.,
The risk principle in the RNR model posits that the likelihood of an offender is predictable (Andrews, 2001; Andrews & Bonta, 2006). The risk principle relates to the offenders need for intervention based on their risk level. High risk individuals require more intense levels of intervention compared to low risk individuals. Low risk offenders are more likely to reoffend if they are treated along with high risk criminals. Therefore, minimal intervention is given to low risk offenders (Warren, 2007). The need principle relates to criminogenic needs; the attitudes and behaviours that are conducive towards criminal behaviour. These factors that cause individuals to engage in criminal behaviour are therefore targeted by the treatment program. Finally, the responsivity principle is the mode of tailoring the treatment method to the offender’s abilities (Andrews, 2001; Andrews & Bonta, …show more content…
Proponents of the GLM suggest that it makes up for the RNR model being too punitive and risk focused, or that it is too controlling rather than focusing on the good in individuals. GLM is an approach that sees individuals from a humanistic approach that they are ultimately good. It is a strengths based approach. Andrews et al., (2011) suggests that GLM is an untested approach targeting non-criminogenic needs and therefore not reducing recidivism. Despite the proponents of GLM contesting the efficacy of RNR, RNR models do encapsulate the humanistic principles that are suggested it lacks (Andrews et al., 2011). Additionally, RNR methods have evolved over time to keep up with changes in research on what is deemed effective in reducing recidivism. All the while, identifying other humanistic aspects that can be targeted in treatment to provide greater moral treatment of offenders and ultimately less recidivism. Any effective aspects of the GLM are already encapsulated in the widely used RNR approach (Andrews et al.,