Category: Prison

The Problems and Ways of Improvement the Prison System in the UK

In England and Wales, the prison system is in crisis. Self-harming in prison has reached a record high of 61,461 cases in the past 12 months up to September 2019; compared to the previous 12 months that’s an increase of 16% (Government, 2020).

The National Probation Service are also under pressure to provide appropriate rehabilitation and supervision services to prisoners who have left prison; however, there is a shortage of staff, which means there is a higher case load which they are trying to resolve. The Government stated that it is their priority to make more spaces in prison, but without support from other resources in terms of prison safety and services that are available for prisoners after leaving, this could potentially put offenders in a very violent and dangerous place, with a very low possibility of reform or rehabilitation (Janjeva, 2020).

At the beginning of 2019 in the UK, the Justice committee published a report on the state of existing government capabilities, and the current attitude towards funding of prisons, in order to help increase population capacity, which their forecast stated was ineffective, unproductive and not manageable in both the short and long term. The prison population is increasing. In England and Wales, the number of prisoners has nearly doubled in the past 25 years. In 1993 there were 44,246 prisoners and that number had risen to 82,384 in December 2018 (Garside, 2018). Additionally, over the past ten years, government has created more new criminal offences than were introduced in the previous 100 years. Due to the increase in numbers, prisons are often overcrowded and unable to facilitate the inmates, as a result of a deficiency in staff numbers and rehabilitative services. These services often come in the form of education, offending behaviour programmes, substance misuse treatment and mental health care, all of which have been severely reduced. The committee identified that this has resulted in vast amounts of money being wasted (Garside, 2018).

As there have been many changes made to legal aid funding, this should also be taken into consideration within the larger perspective of the benefits it has added.

A rigorous Government austerity programme was designed to stop a culture of wellbeing dependence, where hard work was rewarded and public funds were used to help applicants engage in back to work activities (HM Government 2010; Patrick 2012, p. 6). The programme concentrates on people going back to work and focuses on the priciples of what makes a good citizen (Anderson, 2013, p. 27; Patrick, 2012).

The transformation of the welfare system consequently has not been promoted purely as a cost-cutting design, but also as a cultural transformation that produces fruitful benefits of the taxpayers’ money (Flynn et al., 2017).

However, there is also an issue of the prisoners’ living conditions. England and Wales have been mostly affected, for the past several years the prison conditions have been deteriorating (House of Commons, 2018). Prison is not and never has been a relaxed or happy place to be. Notwithstanding this fact, to find the solution of how to improve the situation and the crisis, the main aim would be to determine what are seen to be the working dysfunctions or flaws of the jails themselves (Criminal Justice, 2018).

The Prisons Minister for England and Wales, stated that the key to stopping the prisons crisis would be going back to basics: prisons should be operated in a decent and clean way instead of ‘abstract conversations… about grand bits of prison policy’ (Stewart, 2018). He strongly suggested that with a concrete plan of action put in to place, the conditions of prisons could be improved. However, as the idea of change was not followed through, Stewart resigned from his position the following year (The Guardian, 2019).

Social control perspective looks at broader characteristics of social control to show the ‘deeper structure’ with the use of punishment (Cohen, 1984). Whilst a somewhat contentious issue, Duff and Garland (1994) look at the question of how people coordinate and use their power to discipline those that do not follow the rules. The difference can be distinguished easily by using Hudson’s ‘(1996; 2003, p. 10)view which asserts that the philosophy of punishment reflects on how issues should be resolved and the ways of doing it. The sociology of this explains why specific cultures accept exact styles of punishment (Carrabine, 2014).

One of the steps taken by the government in 2018 was to employ an additional 2500 prison staff. However, this did little to counteract the nearly 7000 staff members who had been made redundant or who took voluntary redundancy in the period between 2012 and 2016. The next step was to tackle the problem of reoffending by focusing on supporting the prisoners while in prison and concentrating on issues before they happened again in order to break the cycle (Garside, 2018).

Statistics and comparison to Europe

According to Prison Statistics in 2014, compared to Europe, the UK has the largest number of prison residences, a total of 93,665 taking into consideration all three prison organizations (England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) (Fulton, 2016).

In the many European countries there has been a big drop in the number of staff members between 2010-2015.The Council of Europe Statistics for the time between 2008 and 2013 show that, in 17 of the 29 EEA countries, the number of staff has gone down. The numbers of staff members have gone from 308,647 in 2008 to 293, 356 in 2013, which is a big drop of 5.0%, even though the figures are showing that there has been increase in prisoners of 1.5% overall in those 29 countries. Prison staff are described as people employed in the reformatory system, both under the authorization of the state prison administrations or of an alternative public authority, for example, health ministry, participating in the safety, behaviour, education or other activities of prisoners. The biggest fall in the staff members was experienced in the UK (21.2%) and Latvia (30.5%) between 2008 and 2013, according to Annual Penal Statistics Council of Europe. Looking at this report, an image emerges showing that prison services are under pressure throughout Europe; staff members are struggling to cope with the number of offenders, increases in violence and are under a large amount of stress. Union service plays a big role in defending and trying to better the terms and conditions of the members and attempts to give a good service to the prisoners (Fulton, 2016).

Although, in UK, the Justice Committee report states the current aim of the government seems to focus on safety and decency, which comes at a big cost to the rehabilitation of the prisoners. There are four key criteria of HMCIP, which are: Safety, Respect, Purposeful activity, and rehabilitation and release planning.

There must be a change, so a dual method could be applied for both safety and decency, but which also focuses on making better rehabilitation for the prisoners (UK Parliament 2019). The Criminal Justice Act of 1948 put a stop to free labour, hard labour and violence towards prisoners in England and Wales prisons. This was one of the steps to change the perspective of prison, to look at it as a place of change/reform instead of punishment. Existing legislation is in place in order to tackle the issue (Prison service orders, prison service instructions, prison rules Act, 1999). Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Prisons (HMCIP) has stated in his annual report how more focus will be made on the safety of staff/prisoner, rehabilitation and release planning, highlighting positive work going on in prisons (UK Parliament, 2019).

Andrew Coyle has pointed out boundaries on the penal system in UK and strongly believes that there has to be a change. Through the creation of the Howard League for Penal Reform, there has been a real focus on the necessity to distinguish among internal (largely economic) issues and external ones motivated by punishing (Fairweather et al., 2013).

Marzano (2012) maintains that prisoners are affected by the change of circumstances they are in and how they would like to be treated by staff, as well as what impact it has on them. Marzano (2012) concentrates on self-harming in prisons and prisoners’ expectations of staff members. Most of the prisoners that took part in the interview stated that they would like more care and support, but most of all understanding of why they are self-harming or trying to commit suicide. Also, to look at the issue of detoxification and sudden lack of control over the situation they find themselves in. What has also been cited during the interviews was that many prisoners wanted to be considered as adults and taken seriously (Marzano, 2012). Offenders have stated that there is so much violence and death in prison, sometimes it is hard to be a part of it. When there is not enough support and help to care for mental health, prisoners often feel left to their own devices. Staff that take time to build relationships with the prisoners and talk to them have more chance in making a difference and helping them with their mental health and wellbeing. The interview showed the positive impact prison staff can have on people as long as they treat them like human beings (Marzano et al., 2012).

Home Office Crime Reduction Strategy have committed considerable financial means for creating an evidence-based therapy system to be used, not only in prisons but also in probation services, this is done to very high standard (Krause 2019al.,1999; Home Office, 199a). This design focuses on the behaviour of each offender, but also the facilities they are in, looking deeper behind the crime committed and the reason behind it. This treatment matched the political and ideological Zeitgeist: forma of sociological assessment, which sensitises a phenomenon that can be defined autonomously and include trans-historical schemes or binaries or group-specific designs. Distanced from an idealist custom in historiography, that make a strong judgment about times as cohere). This assessment approach has been used to help offenders and can be proven in “What Works” literature (Craig et al., 2013) as something that is working. Studies have shown that this lower reoffending by 10%, which, whilst small, is significant (Lipesy, 1995: Losel, 1995). Cognitive-behavioural programs are successful and effective. However, not all prisoners qualify for it or have access to this treatment. Prison staff and probation officers unfortunately do not have the capacity to provide it to every offender in the criminal justice system (McMurran, 2002). The main criteria to join the programme is motivation to change. Miller (1985) pointed out that motivation is judged on the basis if the client accepts the therapist’s point of view of the issue and complies with the treatment prescribed. However, not all prisoners have the motivation to invest effort into self-development and improvement (McMurran, 2002).

Conclusion

The criminal justice system is working on making improvements, however they are not looking enough to the issue of decreasing staff numbers and increasing numbers of prisoners. There is also not enough done to prevent reoffending, but also to protect staff’s mental health.

As stated by Emma Disley (Research Group Director, Home Affairs and Social policy RAND Europe) the way to improve would be to stop focusing on short term results over a short period of time. It is more crucial to focus on prisoners and the effect prison has on them and their lives, instead of short advice about a programme for the short amount of time they have spent in prison. As stated before, prison has an impact on an individual and in many cases, it might take a long period of time to realise, in that case the more practical and suitable timeframes could be set.

However, UK prisons are facing very difficult times at the moment and current programmes being measured could potentially have play an important role in prisons’ effectiveness and have a significant impact on prisoner.

The Peculiarities Of Prison Officer Work

Previously the role of a prison officer was merely a turnkey, expected to ensure that prisoners were behaving in a disciplined manner and safety was kept (Bennett et al., 2008). In the late nineteenth century and beyond, the role of the officer developed and changed, to a moral reformer. Previously seen as ‘invisible ghosts of penalty’ (Liebling, 200, p. 337), prison sociology depends on depiction of the guards as merely shadowy figure, peripheral influence (Sparks et al., 1996, p. 60) which would no longer be supported (Bennett et al., 2008).

In 1991 Lord Woolf and then Lord Chief Justice completed a review of the Prison Service (RT. Hon. Dell 1991), after the riots in HMP Strangeways. Lord Woolf found the problem that lies at the bottom of the heart of the work of the Prison Service. His results found a high standard and profound dedication of the majority of staff and their extreme devotion and passion to what they did (Coyle, 2016). The majority of prison staff were also very supportive of one another and had good relationship with prisoners. Majority of prison staff want to see positive changes to the prisons, although a disagreement was also noticed which occurred among all levels of Prison Service staff. They were crushed under a layer of depression (Coyle, 2016), as there was a not enough faith or belief in what they did was valuable. They harboured a profound feeling of disappointment that the work which they were dedicating to the service was not appreciated (Prison Disturbances: April 1990).

Due to the suggestions of the Woolf report, there have been many changes to the role of prison officers. The service seems to be more professionalised (Liebling et al., 2010) with one of the most positive changes being an improved arrangement among the main aims of the prison and the predispositions of prison staff. Since then, most officers seem to be more content with the public safety framework, and due to those changes, there is less role conflict and more understanding of a prison officer’s role in how to combine the security and care role. However, that has been obvious changes that has come with time: growth in population, the sentences have become more complex, therefore the demands on prison officers has grown, so the information about the prison staff is also not up to date anymore (Liebling et al., 2010).

In 2019 after the murder of two people at London Bridge, the Queen declared some changes in sentencing in her speech (they were murdered by convicted terrorist who has served only half of his sentenced). The new rules meant that the sentences for crimes that are more serious would be toughened, which includes terrorism (minimum time has increased to 14 years), murder and violent offences. From this point there would be no more half-way releases during the sentence. Criminals that have been given four or more years in prison (for the more serious crimes) would have to serve at least two-thirds of their sentence, before being able to be released. This also takes in consideration many people that potentially could spend their entire life in prison (UK Parliament, 2019).

And of course, there is as well competition from private sector, which results in competition with the numbers of staff to set the threshold, salary, compensation (Liebling et al., 2011). However, despite this research, prison staff have been neglected in academic literature. Hay and Sparks (1991, p. 1) questioned the role, as it seemed to them to have become inconsistent and barely defined. They felt that prison officer’s role does not really state what should be done on an everyday basis (cited in Liebling et al., 2010).

According to a former director general of the Prison Service, rehabilitation of criminals in prison is not successful and should be abolished (The Guardian, 2019). Sir Martin Narey (Narey, 2019) found in his research an underlying connection between rehabilitation and decreased recidivism is missing and short courses cannot repair issues produced by tough childhoods. According to him, the only thing prison can offer to the offenders is an environment where there is “decency and dignity” for them, as this provides them with the foundation to self- grow. He also said that dangerous prisons, with inappropriate environments, are stopping further growth and causing more damage for those who have to stay there (The Guardian, 2019).

Even though a crime committed in prison can be similar to the crime in society, there are some significant differences. Some prisoners that try to run illegal businesses, that have more entrepreneurial points of view, will attempt to make quick money and also aim to get as much as possible, and as those claims have to be carefully taken at face value, there are obviously prisoners that are getting richer from the business in prison. However as this is a big issue and goes beyond the problem of finding someone with possession of drugs or a mobile phone (Treadwell, 2019).

There are however things in place to try and control crime and protect both prisoners and staff members. Firstly, there was The Prison Act 1952, which has been updated since to Prison Rules 1999 (“the Prison Rules”). It contains rules for 29 crimes committed in prison and the punishment for them, that includes violating lawful instructions, declining a compulsory drug test, being in possession of an illegal item (drugs, phone), amongst others. If a prisoner has committed a crime, he potentially can face two justice and pseudo-justice procedures, depending on the severity of the crime (Treadwell, 2019).

In August 2019, Boris Johnson initiated a £100m programme to try and tackle crime in prisons, alongside establishing ways to improve rehabilitation. This was an attempt to try and stop the drugs, weapons and mobile phones that are being smuggled into prisons, so victims and staff members can be safeguarded, and was supposed to make prisons appropriately prepared to reform and rehabilitate (BBC 08/2019).

According to the government website, to be good prison officer the person has to be respectful and considerate towards others (Government, 2019). In difficult situations, where tensions are high, they have to stay calm and civil. Also, they need to have good listening skills and be able to maintain order without ordering, to be able to recognise that prisoners are still people. A part of prisoner officer’s role is also to be positive towards rehabilitation, having that skill to support people while they want to make that change. An efficient officer uses authority sensibly and competently. They are reasonable and clear in how they require prisoners to accept the rules. By acting in this way, they are able to gain respect and trust (Liebling, 2011).

Modern prison staff provide professional treatment for prisoners and development programmes and perhaps have created an improved therapy intermediation role over the years. Research reveals, that if staff that have a constructive or human services orientation in their line of work, then they have a more rewarding work experience (Whitehead et al.,1987).

Prison staff have to work hard to meet standards of a good officer and gaining public support is a critical part of handling stress. When management have good systems in place, prison officers are able to provide prisoners with support and also able to access other forms of assistance. For staff, the ability to fulfil this part of their duty partly depends on their commitment to ask for this help from the prisoner.

According to data collected from 187 male maximum-security prisons, offenders barely ever ask for support; however, this also depends on the issue. It seems that prisoners seem to be more willing to report issues that are not based on emotional problems (Hobbs et al., 2000). The statistics indicate that inmates only access to assistance is through prison staff, so prisoners that need support would be hesitant to obtain help. Furthermore, if attempts to distinguish inmates at risk of self-harm were dependent on inmates’ self-disclosure of distress, then these attempts may not be successful, as if they are committed to do it, they will (Hobbs et al., 2000).

Also, for the prisoner to approach the staff member, there has to be the bond of trust between them (Lombardo, 1989). However, this is only one of the issues between this bond. More ‘traditional culture’ and ‘punitiveness’ have different levels of thresholds, further than there are undesirable outcomes for prisoners. One of the big issues that occurs is when staff are too anti-management and anti-prisoner, with resilient and sceptical staff abusing their authority and holding off from inmates (Walker, 2017).There are however issues which arise when officers either abuse their position of power or establish personal relationships with certain prisoners. In those cases, the staff might be too trusting of prisoners, which is when corruption can occur (Coyle, 2003).

In some cases, personal circumstances can lead to wrong choices on the part of the officer. An officer’s cultural background can also affect how they look at crimes, opinions on situations can be impacted by numerous reasons involving mental health and different level of education. Where there is inconsistency, the officer may not be sure how to behave or what to do in a particular situation due to lack of knowledge or things not being in the right place (Walker, 2017).

Conclusion

As Logan (1992) stated, sometimes it seems that the prisoner officer is being too tough or not sympathetic enough towards the inmates, but in certain circumstances, this attitude leads to positive prisoner results. Certain approaches do not always translate into performance in a simple manner. As an alternative, they are reconciled by methods of expertise and competence, that are themselves linked to levels of knowledge and staffing relationships. The experience for prisoners is also affected by elements such as prison layout and material conditions, although they are less important and impactable then staff and their attitude in establishing the value of prison life for inmates.

Prison Reform Essay: The Reasons And Significance

Introduction to Prison Reform

It is a proven fact that once someone from a family is imprisoned, family connections and relations become weaker. This means that every time someone is imprisoned, their family will not necessarily disperse, but grow apart. Prison systems in the United States should be reformed because medical care is lacking, guards are not getting the proper training, and prison programs (for drug rehabilitation, GED/college, and reintegration) are not available or need funding.

Historical Initiatives in Prison Reform

Prison reform was started in the early 1840’s by a woman named Dorothea Dix. Dix started this to improve conditions of the mentally ill. This mostly affected the prisoners with mental illnesses and defects. One of the first prison reform groups actually started inside of a prison. An important court case involving prison reform is Hudson v. Palmer. This case was about being harassed and violated with unnecessary shakedowns. To fix the problems, prison reform has reduced recidivism rates by implementing programs for the inmates and the penal system has slowly become more effective. We are still dealing with this problem today due to guards being corrupt and not going by the book, prisons are not being monitored as well as we’d like.

Programs Benefiting Inmates

There are a few programs available to prisons that are very beneficial. “To prepare offenders for return to their communities and reduce recidivism, inmates are provided opportunities while incarcerated to address health needs and develop life and work skills. Correctional facilities may offer inmates substance abuse and mental health treatment, and some institutions offer educational classes such as literacy classes, English as a Second Language, parenting classes, wellness education, adult continuing education, and library services.” Prisoners are being released after long periods of time and are not being correctly reintroduced into society, these programs will successfully help inmates reintegrate into society. “In most cases, inmates who do not have a high school diploma or a General Educational Development (GED) certificate must participate in the literacy program for a minimum of 240 hours or until they obtain the GED. Non-English-speaking inmates must take English as a Second Language.” In some cases, prisoners might not be up to par educationally due to maybe a bad upbringing so programs are provided to help them get their GED’s and maybe study another language. This matters because society would want inmates to change so in order to help them do so, programs would help them be more of an abiding citizen. This might reduce the incarceration rate of many families in the United States.

Medical Attention in Prisons

Medical attention in our prisons today are lacking because inmates are not receiving the treatment necessary to help improve their health. In an article based on medical aid in prisons, it states that “Each day, men, women, and children behind bars suffer needlessly from lack of access to adequate medical and mental health care.” Although medical aid is funded, it is not really provided to the ones who need it the most. People are brought in entitled to it yet are not even thought about when incarcerated. “For inmates with chronic or acute medical conditions, the Bureau operates several medical referral centers providing advanced care.” Only the people in dire need get the medical attention that they need, other people they do not take so seriously. This matters because although other inmates that are not in critical condition might not be in such dire need, they can still be in pain and should be cared for no matter what the circumstances. Neglecting inmates would be considered cruel and unusual punishment.

Challenges with Recidivism

Recidivism is when an ex criminal is reconvicted of further criminal offense. ”More than 65 percent of those released from California’s prison system return within three years”. It is proven that recidivism rates are lowered when attending programs that reintegrate an inmate into society. “According to a report by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) about 68 percent of 405,000 prisoners released in 30 states in 2005 were arrested for a new crime within three years of their release from prison.” Without these programs being implemented, recidivism rates will not decrease and would probably increase. Inmates could potentially be imprisoned for a long period of time and with all that time isolated from others, other than when they’re fed, they could possibly lose their sense of communicating. With programs regarding reintegration, people will eventually not need to be trained outside of the prison system but rather inside the prison system.

Management and Guard Training in Prisons

Management in prisons is enforced by prison guards and they are not doing such a good job at what they are hired to do. “In North Carolina, newly hired prison officers usually get just one week of orientation before they’re put to work.” A big problem in prisons is poor training. Guards are trained to a minimum before actually working inside of a prison. When working inside those prisons with minimal training, the average person would expect problems. Guards are often persuaded to be on the prisoners side because their low sense of morality. Getting hired to become a prison guard is so easy now that even gang affiliated citizens are getting hired and sometimes even supplying inmates with drugs and weaponry. “Despite millions of taxpayers’ dollars spent in the past year to increase safety in prisons and lessen contraband, bad prison guards — some corrupt, some indifferent, some sympathetic to gangs or in gangs themselves — are working to ensure the efforts fall flat, say more than 60 former and current inmates interviewed by The State Media Co. and their advocates.” The employers of these prison guards are obviously not taking their job seriously because they are not running backgrounds on who they are hiring and that’s causing more and more corrupt prison guards to get hired. This is important to prisons because if inmates are getting their weapons from corrupt guards, that means they are responsible for some of the non-corrupt guards death for actually doing what was right and having morals. In the future, if employers start acting now, there would be way less corruptivity in prison systems and less deaths on the prisons guards because then there would be no way of getting weapons unless they take advantage of the prisons safety hazards.

Reevaluating the Cash Bail System

Another thing in need of reform is the cash bail system. People struggle to make bail because they are not as wealthy as the next person. “In the United States, poor defendants often remain in jail because they cannot afford to pay the cash bail, while wealthier defendants go free because they have cash on hand to pay their bail. Because this system is so unfair, some states have already taken steps to eliminate it.” The cash bail system is so flawed that some states have removed it entirely. A lot of the time, real criminals are the ones with the wealth and often make bail but the ones that are falsely incriminated are poor and can not make bail. It is a very unfair system. “Originally, bail was supposed to make sure people return to court to face charges against them. But instead, the money bail system has morphed into widespread wealth-based incarceration.” This is a prime example of how flawed the bail system is. The poor and people of color are usually the targets for who to frame because those are the people who are usually not able to make bail. This is important because pretty soon, criminals are going to be the ones with money and will never be punished for their crimes unless the courts are willing to reform the bail system.

Cruel and unusual punishment is a phrase describing punishment that is considered unacceptable due to the suffering, pain, or humiliation it inflicts on the person subjected to it. “When a man named Almighty Supreme Born Allah was held at a Connecticut prison in advance of his trial on drug charges, officials there locked him in solitary confinement and forced him to wear leg irons even as he showered.” In this situation, he was not supposed to be in solitary confinement due to him being a pretrial detainee. They violated his constitutional rights without hesitation and were not really punished for it for using the excuse called “qualified immunity”. “According to evidence and testimony at a federal civil rights trial, far worse things were happening at the prison than inmates strolling around during a lockdown: A mentally ill man on suicide watch hanged himself, gang members were allowed to beat other prisoners, and those whose cries for medical attention were ignored resorted to setting fires in their cells.” Despite inmates not getting the treatment they are entitled to, they are not getting treated by guards and other inmates correctly either. Guards often let inmates bully other inmates for the fun of it. A usual occurrence that happens between inmates is “gassing”. “Gassing” is when one inmate throws their feces at another inmate. This mostly happens when guards let it happen because it usually is not possible without the help of a guard. This is important because making this an often occurrence can maybe lead to the death of an inmate if taken too far. In the long run, prisoner abuse, if reformed, will help taxpayers save money because cases regarding prison abuse are usually won by the inmate and they win compensation or a good settlement.

Although a lot of people might believe drugs are the big issue in the crime region, they are getting the wrong idea. People need to focus on the violent crimes because that is what makes up over half of the prison population. Criminals convicted of a non-drug related crime are getting less harsh punishments because that is not their priority. Most people that are being arrested are being arrested for drug related crimes that are not serious. They are sentenced and placed in prisons and prisons get too crowded due to unnecessary convictions. Instead of letting the real criminals go because of overcrowding, release the ones that are there for a crime that should not be worried about such as possession of a drug.

Conclusion: The Urgent Need for Comprehensive Reform

In conclusion, prison is in need of serious reform because the way the system works is outdated and lacking in morality and prisoners do not deserve the way inmates, guards, and doctors treat them.

The Reasons, Types And Effects Of Drugs In Prison

For decades, illegal smuggling of drugs has been a severe problem in England and Wales prisons. According to Alex (2018), approximately 40% of incarcerated individuals test positive for drugs. Prisoners who use drugs suffer from mental and physical health complications, and their likelihood of recovering are minimal.

Also, addicted prisoners pose a severe threat to the society since on release they often commit crimes to fund their habits. In a nutshell, the core purpose of the prisons is to reduce crime, but with the current situation, it’s clear that they are failing.

For this reason, there is need to adopt mitigation measures such as keeping drugs out of prison, reducing the demand of drugs in prison and offering recovery support to prisoners who are battling addiction (Lappi-Seppälä, & Nuotio, 2019) The interventions mentioned above are dependent; thus failure of one aspect will undoubtedly result to failure to address the drug menace in prison.

The core mandate of the Criminal justice system is to serve justice to offenders while protecting the public. The United Kingdom has enacted three principal statutes that aim to control drug use they include The Misuse Of Drugs Act (1971), The Medicines Act (1968), and the Psychoactive Substances Act (2016).

The Misuse Of Drugs Act (MIDA), aims at forbidding non-medical usage of drugs in U.K. To effectively implement this law, law enforcement agency have the authority to cease, arrest and search individuals on reasonable notion that they have controlled drugs. Psychoactive Substances Act (2016), regulates production, possession, and supply of psychoactive substances. In this context, the maximum sentence of offenders is seven years. The Medicines Act 1968 governs supply and manufacture of medicine. It also requires a pharmacist to obtain dealers license for accountability purposes.

According to Ashworth (2015), criminal punishment can be categorized into five main components namely; incapacitation, deterrence, retribution, rehabilitation, and restoration. Incapacitation aims at preventing the occurrence of future crime by moving criminals away from the community. The punishment can be informed of house arrest, the death penalty, life imprisonment and incarceration (Hayes, 2018).

Deterrence seeks to convince citizens and re-offenders or possible offenders to strictly remain to the rule of law (Pereboom, 2018). However, the effectiveness of this form of punishment is hard to assess since individuals may follow the law for other reasons such as moral beliefs, lack of opportunity or incapacitation. Retributions represent one of the oldest forms of punishment. Wenzel (2016) highlights that retribution prevents crime by assuring the victims and the society that the defendant has been punished accordingly thus creating a narrative that the criminal justice system is functioning effectively.

According to Doggett (2017), Rehabilitation is a standard policy in the U.S and U.K, and it aims at assisting the criminals, and prisoners overcome the challenges that motivated them to commit crimes. It encompasses the development of occupational skills and combating psychological issues such as aggression and drug addiction.

Restoration is a relatively new approach in the criminal justice system. Ideally, it entails amending the relationship between the victim and the society or community in which the offense was committed. The process of restoration initiates a mechanism where the offender meets with the victim and share feelings and experiences. Also, the dialogue offers a platform for the victim to be heard and for the offender to ask for forgiveness (Strang, & Braithwaite, 2017). Restorative justice is commonly used in crimes linking youth offenders

Theoretical Approaches To Correctional Policy

The main theories used in the criminal justice system include retribution theories, deterrence theories, rehabilitation theories, remediation theories, and self-defense theories all of which forms the basis of correctional policies. The theories are either divided into utilitarian and retributive theories. Retribution theories assert that the offender should be punished proportionally to the crime committed (Tonry, 2018). Additionally, it seeks to punish offenders citing that they deserve to be punished.

According to the retributivist school of thought, individuals have free will thus capable of devising rational decisions . in this context, the offender who is incompetent or insane should not be punished. However, individuals who are capable of making conscious choices to distort the normal functioning of society should be punished accordingly.

Utilitarian theory aims at maximizing the happiness of the community (Lee, 2017) . For this reason, they are consequential and advocate for punishment for both the society and the offender. It asserts that the benefits produced should surpass the total evil. Utilitarian’s comprehend that a crime free society is fictitious; therefore; they are committed to causing punishment as it is required to deter future crimes.

Therefore, criminal justice system incorporates both retributive theory and utilitarian tenets in contemplating the judgments to cater to the needs of both the defendant and the society (Kubrin & Wo, 2016).

HOW DRUGS ARE TRAFFICKED INTO PRISON

The psychoactive substances were the most common progressive drug test results in 2017/18 which of 60% of positive samples comprising them. Additional the second highest was cannabis, at 28%. Increase in drugs being discovered in prison which over the last five years. These types of drug tests are mandatory, but prisoners have the rights to refuse the drug test but will can face disciplinary procedure.

Visitors

Visitors use diverse methods to pass their illegal imports to the prisoners. Necessarily not meaning visitors willingly taking drugs into prison it could also be being forced and being under pressure from the third parties.

Also drugs can be held in a visitor’s mouth which than can be passed to the prisoner (kissing), other ways could be anal or virginal concealment of drugs which is removed when they go to the toilet. Also there are other unnoticeable methods and swallowed or plugged by inmates and hiding packages in children’s clothing/ nappies.

Facts- its understood the government’s spending £15m on new X-ray scanners for jails in England and Wales. A woman who hid cannabis and a mobile phone in her bra for her son while visiting him in prison has been jailed.

A good example is the case of Helen Kyneston, 55, who hid cannabis and a mobile phone in bra for her son while visiting. The woman was seen placing the items into a crisp packed while enjoying her lunch with her son at HMP Peterborough on 2nd Jan. Her son was later searched and items with a prison value of up to £1, 200 were found. For this offence, Kyneston of Eastflieds, Littleport, was jailed for 12 months after she admitted carrying items into prison.

Over prison walls

It is possible for small packages containing drugs to be thrown over the fence or walls. These are than collected by intimates who use illicit mobile phones smuggled into facility to co-ordinate the collection. Furthermore as technologies have advanced, an increase of number of cases have occurred where packages were dropped-in by drones.

Gang members of a gang which used drones to fly more than £500,000 worth of drugs into prison, the gang members were responsible for 55 drone deliveries into prison around the country between April 2016 and June 2017. In one month prison officers seized 28 drug packages, 44 mobile phones and 18 parcels that had been thrown over the perimeter wall, with the estimated total value of more than £15,000.

POST

In 2013/14 in England there were 349 incidents where discovered in prison post .This is due to not all letters being scanned, one institution allowed inmates to receive Christmas cards there was an increase of drugs in prison. For examples in a Scottish prison inmates are no longer allowed to receive their children artwork or drawing after an incidence where powdered Valium was found in the paint. Staff at HMP Shotts in Lanarkshire found that Valium had been painting onto the art work which inmates can cut up and eat it.

ISSUES FACING PRISON REGARDING DRUGS

VIOLENCE

The link between violence and drugs in prison has increased over the years . This results in assaults, blackmail and violence not only between the prisoners, but also against prison employees. Its know that inmates have said to assault, threaten or pressure staff when drugs are short of supply, which is caused by enhanced drug enforcement.

According to the Ministry of justice the number of attacks recorded hit a record of 31,025, up 16 per cent and of which 9,003 were assaults on staff, the figure rose by more than a quarter 26% in the 12months to March. (Jamie Grierson. 2018

New psychoactive substance

Psychoactive Substances Act (2016), regulates production, possession, and supply of psychoactive substances. In this context, the maximum sentence of offenders is seven years.

NPS are known to be drugs which are designed to replicate the effects of illegal substances such as cannabis, cocaine and ecstasy. Nicknamed spice or the zombie drug. It was reported that seizures of spice have increased from 15 in 2010 to 430 during the seven months from 1 Jan to 1 July 2014. during the same period it was recorded there was only 21 seizures of ketamine, mephedrone and benzylpiparazine combined

Symptoms of spice

• Vomiting
• Seizures
• Rapid heart beat
• Suicidal thoughts or action
• Sweating
• Confusion
• Paranoia

NHS report by User Voice hears directly from inmates the true horrors of NPS use in prisons.

Reasons for spice use-

• Boredom
• Self meditation
• Enjoyment
• Coping strategy
• Existing habit

Addiction 77% – Inmates said in their experience spice is more dangerous than heroin

Dept. 73%- Inmates stated it will lead for prisoners to steal form other cells to pay their dept.

Violence 63%- Inmates also said that violence is bond to kick off at any time due to dept. and spice it was also stated that a prisoner can be nice one minute and next turn into a monster.

Bullying 61%-It was said by a prisoner once your in dept. with spice you would have to give your clothes and trainers and you will just watch them get bullied. Also if prisoner were to be incapacitated they can be targeted in a very derogatory way.

Consequences

Mental health 51%

• Decreased blood pressure
• Confusion
• Heart attacks
• Vomiting /seizures
• Harm by violence
• Sweating

Physical health 60%

• Paranoia
• Anxiety
• Hulusnation
• Depression
• Self harm and even sucide

Staff and prisoners under stress

• £900 million – cut 700 staff cuts
• Leading to less temporary release
• Prisoners to spend more time in their cell
• Less self improvement classes

The national chairman of the professional trades union for prison correctional, psychiatric workers said the spike in violence and the cuts are inextcaberly linked

Social problem

There is a positive correlation between penology and social issues. This is because crimes occur in a society influenced mainly by societal norms(Quinney& Shelden, 2018). Also, crimes are directly proportional to the prevailing circumstances in society. Societal factors such as low levels of education, poverty, and affiliation to subcultures among other predispose individuals to crime (Burraston, McCutcheon, & Watts, 2018). According to Haines (2014), social problems escalates the level of crime in the neighborhoods.

According to the office for national statistics (ONS), individuals with disposable income below £10,000 per year often experience violence incidents two times higher than individuals whose income is above £50,000. Social problems and criminology are inseparable. In most cases crime is more experienced in poorer neighborhoods, and individuals who have committed crime are more likely to suffer from social breakdown such as drug addiction, low education levels , and unemployment among others (The center for social justice, 2015)

Conclusion

Drug abuse remains a menace in prisons and policymakers are tasked with ensuring that illicit drugs don’t find their way into the prisons. Be that as it may, addicted inmates should be given recovery support through rehabilitation to minimize the intake of drugs. While crime is a product of social interactions, the government of the UK should come up with policies to suppress social problems such as unemployment, low levels of educations and poverty to reduce delinquency rates.

Criminology theories play an essential role in preserving social solidarity and freedom through the punishment of individuals committing crimes. Therefore criminal justice officials should ensure that a balance is struck between societal needs and individual needs. This will play a critical role in instituting appropriate prevention programs for controlling crime. A criminal justice system remains a vital part of the society. Therefore, courts, law enforcement agencies, and correctional facilities should team up to reduce crimes in the society.

The Challenges And Issues Prison Face As A Criminal Justice Agency

This essay will aim to critically discuss some of the challenges prisons face as a criminal justice agency in the present day and it will also discuss some strategies put in place to ease these challenges within prison. Prisons are the harshest form of punishment for an individual who has committed a criminal offence, The Ministry of Justice (2018) explains the purpose of imprisonment and some aims put in place. Firstly, protection of the public – prison protects the public from the most dangerous and violent individuals. Secondly punishment, prison deprives offenders of their liberty and certain freedoms enjoyed by the rest of society and acts as a deterrent. Lastly, rehabilitation prison provides offenders with the opportunity to reflect on, and take responsibility for, their crimes and prepare them for a law-abiding life when they are released. Furthermore, The Ministry of Justice (2018) state that for prisons to be effective the basics must be right, this includes creating prisons that are secure: with the physical integrity of the prison a priority to prevent prisoners from getting out – and drugs, mobile phones and other contraband from getting in. They also explain that prisons must be safe with orderly, purposeful and structured regimes, free from violence, intimidation and self-harm, and it means creating prisons that are decent: with clean wings and humane living conditions (Ministry of Justice, 2018). Many prisons in the UK have fallen below standard and fail to meet these basic needs as they face many challenges every day.

To begin with, one challenge that’s majorly affecting prisons as a criminal justice agency is that with crime rates rapidly increasing prisons are becoming overcrowded. In the UK today, there are 83,525 prisoners in England and Wales, including young offender institutions (The Howard League, 2020). Under the Ministry of Justice’s own definition of safety and decency, the prison estate should not hold more than 74,954 people. There are currently 8,571 men and women held above this level (The Howard League, 2020). In the 15 years since the first edition of the World Prison Population List the estimated prison population has increased by 25-30% but at the same time the population has risen by over 20%, and the world population prison has risen by 6% (Jewkes et al, 2016, pg 101). Jewkes et al (2016, pg 101) explains that the prison has, increasingly, become an automatic policy response to an ever growing range of social issues and problems. There appears to be a growing consensus that imprisonment is an acceptable measure not only as a response to street, interpersonal and property crime, but also to activities not straightforwardly defined as ‘criminal’, such as mental illness, homelessness, and public drunkenness. This suggests that people are becoming imprisoned for committing crimes that aren’t seen to be worthy of a prison sentence and they could potentially be given an alternative form of punishment such as probation, this could be a contributing factor towards overcrowding in prisons if the punishment is not seen to be necessary. With a growing population crime rates are increasing and the amount of people receiving prison sentences is also increasing causing an overload of prisoners meaning prisons are having to cope beyond their capacity. There are many implications due to overcrowding prisons, for example it can lead to insanitary, violent conditions that are harmful to the physical and mental well-being of prisoners (MacDonald 2018). Overcrowding includes the doubling or tripling up of inmates in a cell that should only accommodate one person this meaning privacy is not always possible, many of these cells have unscreened toilets which fail to provide even the most basic human dignity (Silvestri, 2013). Living a life where a person is restricted from having that privacy can cause anger and frustration adding pressure to existing mental health illnesses or creating them, it is more of a challenge to meet standards for humane conditions when prisons are working well over 100% of their capacity. It also becomes harder to manage prisons effectively as overcrowding puts pressure on resources and reduces the space for educational and rehabilitative programmes which is essential for prison life (MacDonald 2018). Where prisons lack in providing these programmes such as rehabilitation this increases the rates of reoffending when inmates are released, as well as these programmes supporting inmates who are mentally ill. Very little has changed for nearly 30 years, overcrowding has always been one of the biggest issues for prisons and for improvement it must be rooted out.

Moving on to another challenge that is faced by prisons is under staffing due to the difficulties prisons face when trying to maintain staff and recruit them too. For example since 2010 there have been significant reductions in the number of prison staff with frontline staff reduced by almost a quarter (23%). This has resulted in less staff looking after approximately 800 additional prisoners (MacDonald, 2018). A reason behind this could be that workers in security services are more vulnerable to occupational stressors and strains than other professional groups, particularly high levels of burnout and mental health problems have been found in prison officers, this due to their frequent exposure to violence means that post-traumatic stress disorder is common (Kinman, 2017). Working within a prison can be a difficult job to up-take and with overcrowding on the rise more staff are required to cope with capacity and this would also explain a higher turnover of staff who may have been affected negatively through work. A few statistics showing the working conditions for prison staff are, in the 12 months to December 2016 assaults on prison staff rose by 38% to 6844 incidents and of these assaults 789 were serious (Clarke, 2017). This allows us to see how severe the conditions can be within a prison and why there is likely to be such a shortage of staff due to unsafe working conditions and lack of violence control. Not only are prisons understaffed but working in overcrowded prisons can impact negatively on staff morale, this would then have a knock on effect on the mental health of staff and performance at work would be minimal affecting the overall atmosphere within the prison (MacDonald, 2018). Following on from before, overcrowding is a huge contributing factor to why staff struggle to cope with capacity, simply too many inmates will outnumber the staff and their control over prisoners will not be as strong as they need it to be, thus leading to violence and assault. This sense of aggravation and lack of morality means conditions within prison are unsafe and dangerous.

Continuing on, a further challenge that is faced every day is how unsafe the prison environment is as a whole. A report was made after the inspection of HMP Liverpool in 2018, it stated that many prisoners had to endure squalid living conditions with rats, cockroaches, damp, dirt and hundreds of broken windows with jagged glass in the frames and filthy or leaking toilets (Travis, 2018). This is evidence that shows prisons are an unsafe place to be, living conditions such as this can be a danger to the physical health of inmates due to the lack of hygiene and is fundamentally unsafe. Those having to live in these conditions are inevitably going to suffer both mentally and physically from being deprived of humane living conditions, this then resulting in frustration and distress likely to be encouraging violence within prisons. Putting poor living conditions aside, a further problem faced as an agency is substance abuse within prisons and how to stop inmates from accessing these illegal drugs. For example, a psychoactive substance also known as ‘spice’ is taken very frequently within prisons, commonly reported immediate effects include agitation, psychosis, hypertension and seizures, due to the accessibility and low cost of this drug it is very common within prisons (Gov UK, 2019). In the UK, the last decade has seen rapid growth in both availability and use and some argue that their increased use in UK prisons may link to increases in violence, self-harm and death in custody (Gov UK, 2019). Where inmates do have free-will to take these drugs, there is a lack of control over contraband within prisons and strategies to minimise the accessibility of drugs should be put into action to prevent suicide, self-harm, mental illness and violence as these all encourage the prison as an environment to be a dangerously unsafe place. The rate of self-injury has more than doubled among male prisoners since 2010 with self-harm at record levels with 42,837 incidents – in an ideal world inmates should be restricted from drug use to limit these numbers of self-harm (MacDonald, 2018). During the same inspection in HMP Liverpool in 2018, violence of all kinds has increased and since the previous inspection in 2015 nearly two thirds of prisoners said it was easy to obtain drugs (Travis, 2018), this implies that it is becoming easier for prisoners to get drugs into prison as time goes on. However, there is evidence to show that schemes have been put in place to change behaviour within prison. The Incentives and Earned Privileges (IEP) system was introduced in 1995. It is a tool of prison management. As stated by the Prison Reform Trust, the scheme: promotes conforming behaviour through rational choice. Enabling people to earn benefits in exchange for responsible behaviour (Pratt and Grimwood, 2014, pg 1). But with this scheme being introduced 25 years ago statistics show that drug abuse has also significantly risen since then, drugs are used and accessed more so it could be that those in prison choose substance abuse over good behaviour. It could be argued that the EIP scheme isn’t strong enough to impact behaviour and inmates would rather risk punishment over reward to satisfy their needs in prison by taking drugs. Ultimately meaning that the scheme is ineffective, drug abuse continues regardless and prison remains an unsafe environment.

Conclusively, as a criminal justice agency, prisons are challenged and face extreme measures with few resolutions to the problems. The main focus would be inmates themselves, the violence and danger influenced by drug use, poor mental health through things such as overcrowding and that lack of personal space they recieve. Poor living conditions in various prisons within the UK also challenge behaviour and both physical and mental health. Collectively, if extra staff are recruited, better schemes are implemented with tougher discipline, it will be easier to tackle some of the challenges faced, as crime rates rise this is essential to meet the basic needs of a prison.

Reintegration Of Ex-prisoners Using The Human Rights Approach

Overview

The preceding chapter presented the findings of the study using a thematic approach. This chapter discusses the findings presented in chapter four. This chapter is arranged based on subtitles arising from the major findings of each objective in chapter four. The subtitles in this chapter are arranged as follows; the international and national legal framework in relation to prisoner’s rights to remunerable employment, the extent to which the Zambia Correctional Service complies with international instruments in relation to prisoner’s rights to remunerable employment, extent to which national policy impede the Zambia Correctional Service from implementing its mandate.

Before looking at the various human rights instruments and standards existing at the international level, a word about the legal force of these standards would be in order. The collective body of standards examined and discussed in this study spans the full range of international legal authority, from binding obligations set out in various covenants and conventions to morally persuasive universal guidance offered through various declarations, minimum rules, and bodies of principles. Together, these instruments offer a comprehensive and detailed international legal framework for ensuring respect for human rights, freedom and dignity in the context of criminal justice.

In strict legal terms, formal treaties which have been ratified or acceded to by States, as well as customary international law, have the character of binding law. Such treaties, salient to the study, include the following:

• International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;

Mention should also be made of the Charter of the United Nations, itself a legally binding treaty to which all Member States are parties.

Human rights standards are also enshrined in other types of instruments: declarations, recommendations, bodies of principles, codes of conduct and guidelines (such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners, among others). These instruments are not legally binding on States in and of themselves. Nevertheless, the various declarations, guidelines and minimum rules, which are analyzed and discussed in this study hand in hand with the relevant conventions, have moral force and provide practical guidance to States in their conduct with regard to prisoner’s rights. The value of these instruments rests on their recognition and acceptance by a large number of States and, even without binding legal effect, they may be seen as declaratory of principles that are broadly accepted within the international community. What is more, some of their provisions, particularly relevant to the purpose of this study, are declaratory of elements of customary international law and are thus binding.

The study found that although some of the foregoing provisions make general reference to the right of everyone to remunerable employment, they do not specifically single out prisoners and neither do they make any categories of people entitled to these rights. Hence by implication, everyone is entitled to this right regardless of their status.

The international and national legal framework in relation to prisoner’s rights to remunerable employment

The promulgation of human rights standards made in the charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ICCPR and ICESCR make general reference to human rights entitlements for everyone without discrimination. However, these instruments are supplemented by more specific standards such as Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners, among others.

These should not be seen merely as empty statements of principle. The combined effect of these provisions have the legal effect of, once and for all, putting to rest all arguments as to whether human rights and their enjoyment by individuals were subjects for international law, or merely matters of State sovereignty. Consequently, the fact that prison officials are bound by such rules is now beyond dispute.

What is more is that these international instruments have found their way into our national legislation. Part III of the Constitution of Zambia spells out the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual. This part is also known as the Bill of Rights. Article 23 of the Constitution provides protection against all forms of discrimination. By implication, this articles includes employment discrimination based on past criminal record.

With regard to remunerable employment, the study found that Section 75 of the Prisons Act , provides that:

• Every criminal prisoner shall be engaged in such work within or without the precincts of any prison, as may be directed by the officer in charge, and as far as is practicable such work shall take place in association or outside cells with other criminal prisoners…
• A civil prisoner and an unconvicted prisoner may elect to work and if he so elects, shall receive payment at such rates as may be prescribed.

The study found that the ZCS was operating under the old Prisons Act of 1966 whose provisions were outdated and could not be consistent with recent global and national developments. Since the enactment of the 2016 Constitution (Amendment) Act, there was a paradigm shift with regard to the ZCS’ mandate. The Constitution did not only bring about the transformation of the Zambia Prison Service to Zambia Correctional Service, but with it come a mandate shift from placing emphasis on custodial services to placing emphasis on correctional services. As noted by the then Commissioner of Prisons, Mr. Percy Chato when President Edger C. Lungu signed the constitutional amendment Bill on January 5, 2016, “it signaled the transformation of the prisons from punitive institutions to correctional establishments.” He explained that Zambia is a member of the African Correctional Service Association (ACSA), Zambia is required to introduce prison management systems that respect human rights.” Hence, these correctional services entail a robust programme of rehabilitation activities inclusive of which is job placements for prisoners.

The study found that there are serious gaps or grey areas in our current legal framework with regard to the prisoners’ right to remunerable employment. Although the Act makes provision for remunerable employment for civil and unconvicted prisoners, it does not specifically spell out the ZCS mandate to carry out job placements for prisoners apart from the Prisons Standing Order 168(f) which in fact stands in contradiction to the national policy of not employing ex-prisoners in the civil service. The Act is silent on job placements for ex-prisioners, employment of ex-prisoners in the civil service as well as provision of remunerable jobs for criminal convicts as well as those with long years of hard labour sentences. The Act does not also provide for the minimum number of years an ex-prisoner must stay after release before the can be reconsidered for employment in the civil service. The existing law does not also provide sufficient guidance on how the funds earned by prisoners would be used by the prisoner, method of sending some to the family and how the balance would be kept until the prisoner is released. Shockingly, the existing legal framework does not expressly illegalize employment discrimination based on past criminal record. These are salient provisions that would make a big difference in the ZCS current execution or implementation of the new mandate.

Furthermore, the current Act only refers to the establishment of the ZPS and control of prisons and prison officers. It does not clearly state the purpose and all the functions of the ZPS (now ZCS) as intended by the constitutional transformation. It only focuses on custodial services and it does not include the correctional and extension services mandate of the Service.

The extent to which the Zambia Correctional Service complies with international instrument in relation to prisoner’s rights to remunerable employment

The former Commissioner General of Prisons Mr. Percy Chato explained that “as a signatory to a number of international protocols that provide guidelines for modern prison management, Zambia was mandated to change to the correctional system.” Although Zambia is party to numerous international instruments that expressly provide guidance on the prison authority mandate to provide remunerable employment for prisoners, the country has not adequately and fully domesticated these international instruments such as the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners and the Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners which in effect makes compliance to most of their salience provisions simply persuasive.

In addition, the MHA and ZCS have not developed the requisite tools to facilitate for the implementation of rehabilitation and reintegration programmes by prisons. For instance, there was no comprehensive national policy on Internal Security to give Government policy directives on how to manage the prisoners and address their rehabilitation and reintegration needs. In addition, the Prisons Act Cap 97 of the laws of Zambia, its amendment Act No 16 of 2004 and the Prison Act Prison Rules statutory instrument No 101 of 2008 were all outdated and had not been reviewed by ZCS, the MHA and Ministry of Justice as of May 2019. The outdated Act hindered the ZCS and the prisons to carry out rehabilitation and reintegration programmes effectively in line with international instruments in relation to prisoner’s rights to remunerable employment.

The study’s finding of only one prisoner out of the two prisons under investigation being placed in remunerable employment gave a clear indication of ZCS non-compliance levels with international instruments in relation to prisoner’s rights to remunerable employment.

Job placements are part of community re-entry programmes. Finding work upon release is vital for the rehabilitation of a prisoner, as employment provides stability, much needed income and makes the prisoner less likely to return to a life of crime.

The extent to which national policy impede the Zambia Correctional Service from implementing its mandate

The study found that there was no comprehensive national policy to provide guidance on the implementation of the ZCS mandate with regard to rehabilitation and reintegration and specifically remunerable job placements for prisoners. The lack of this national policy compounded with government position of not employing ex-prisoners has made it difficult for the ZCS to implement its mandate as stipulated in under section 76(3) of the Prisons Act as well as Prisons Standing Order 168(f).

It was evident from the participants’ accounts that getting employment after serving time in prison is a major challenge. It would seem that prospective employers view employing ex-offenders as a risk not worth taking. In other words, society is unforgiving when it comes to giving second chances and offering employment opportunities to ex-offenders. While this may be understandable, denying ex-offenders an opportunity to gainfully be employed is simply counter- productive. How can they fend for themselves if they cannot find employment? Does that not predispose the to a life of continued crime? An extensive body of research supports the view that a criminal record or time in prison makes individuals significantly less employable given that most employers do background checks on prospective employees. Ex-offenders often face employment discrimination once they have completed their sentences. This discrimination is often enacted upon completion of employment applications that require responses about past criminal records, figure prints, ect. Ex-prisoners are ruled out before being given an opportunity for interview thus inhibiting employment and increasing the likelihood of repeat offense. Many developed countries such as America, Australia, Britain and Canada have passed legislation as well as national policies prohibiting discrimination based on criminal record. This study therefore found that lack of a comprehensive national policy coupled with government position on not employing ex-prisoners in the civil service impedes ZCS from implementing its mandate with regard to rehabilitation and reintegration and specifically remunerable job placements for prisoners.

Conclusion

The efficacy and importance of this study cannot be over-emphasized. Paying a blind eye to issues of recidivism caused by failure to properly execute rehabilitation, transition and reintegration of ex-prisoners into society using a human rights approach only compromises and threatens our nation’s internal security. To avert this, the MHA and ZCS need to urgently revise the law and come up with a comprehensive national policy to effectively guide the ZCS in the implementation of its mandate.

A Brief History of Prisons

Prior to the 15th Century, incarceration itself was not considered a punishment, but rather a way of holding those who were in debt or awaiting trial. As well as common criminals, prisons at this time were also used to detain political prisoners, prisoners of war, slaves and those convicted of treason. Particularly in the case of the traitor, the prison provided a venue to exhibit the prisoner prior to his punishment.

Many of these early prisons were built partially underground with minimal light. The first examples of cells were built into the ground and accessed by a trapdoor, from which the prisoners were dropped. In the 13th Century, prisons began to separate offenders by offence, however men and women were rarely separated. There is not a lot of evidence on the design of early examples of prisons, however much more can be studied from the prisons built in castles and fortresses between the 12th and 17th centuries as many of them are still standing.

These prisons were typically built of wood inside of stone castles. Generally, the type of prisoners inside of these were political prisoners that were detained as a result of disputes with the rulers, as well as common criminals. These small prisons, or dungeons, were typically built several stories above the ground. Despite the variation in castle architecture during this period, example?, the prisons were usually similar in their design. Tiny slit windows typically sat seven feet or above the floor level. Due to the thickness of the walls, these windows proved ineffective in lighting the space and providing sufficient ventilation. In terms of plumbing, the cells usually featured a hole in the floor that led the sewage into the moat surrounding the castle or fortress.

Aside from these standard cells, some castles features different levels of incarceration, with the most serious offenders being held in the deepest parts of the prison. This level was commonly referred to as “the pits”. Similarly to how earlier prisons exhibited the more serious offenders, usually those who acted against the state, some castles during this period would suspend prisoners in iron cages from the ceiling. These cages were often used for those prisoners of low social status for petty crimes.

These examples of early prisons were, as previously stated, used for holding prisoners whilst they waited for their sentences of death, mutilation or exile. It was only towards the end of the 18th century that authorities had begun to use imprisonment itself as a punishment, having been influenced by the Catholic Church. The Church believed that this was an opportunity for the reform of prisoners, as once they have been led to see the effect and wrongness of their crimes, they could then change their behaviour and be released back into society. Quote?

Physical punishment such as hard labour, solitary confinement and beatings were methods of control within the prisons and used as both a deterrent and an example to other prisoners. These prisons soon became overcrowded due to the extended sentences of the offenders and resulted in a large number of prisoner deaths due to the lack of water, ventilation and basic plumbing systems.

As a result of this overcrowding, prison building increased to accommodate the rising prison population. “Although prison building increased to accommodate the influx of those charged with crimes, prison architecture remained trapped in the past, supporting the idea of confinement and physical punishment rather than inmate reform”. Woodruff supports her argument that designing for punishment was a negative method of incarceration, using the example of Name/Date? in Warwick, UK. This prison was built as an underground prison below a county jail. The prison was designed as octagonal in form, dug six meters into the ground and six and a half meters in diameter.

“It was accessed by several doors and a long staircase, with a grate in the ceiling. In the centre of the dungeon is a small open drain for sewage, which drops down to a spring. Around this pit were eight posts, to which heavy chains were attached. Prisoners were chained by the leg to these posts in circular fashion”.

Most likely as a result of these harsher conditions and treatments, the prisoners began to grow more violent and committed more hardened crimes. During the late 1770s, over half of the prisoners in English prisons were people in debt, with the absolute minority of offenders convicted of more serious crimes. One hundred years later, in the 1870s, only 3 percent of offenders in English prisons were those in debt. It was then that the majority of offenders were of more serious cases such as murder, robbery, rape and arson.

As the prisoners and their offences started to get out of hand during the 18th and 19th centuries, a new prison movement began. The roles of the prison setting itself started to change, with focus on reform rather than only punishing the incarcerated. The High Sheriff of Bedfordshire, John Howard Dates?, after being exposed to the terrible conditions of his local prison, advocated for improvements in prisons and for better treatment of the offenders. What?

Howard, along with Jeremy Bentham, who was the leader of the prison reformers during that period, advocated a new approach to prison building. The prison building was originally built upon incarceration and punishment alone, whereas, after the influence of Howard and Bentham, began to focus on the rehabilitation and basic needs of the prisoners. “Prison designs began to accommodate religious instruction, education and the health of the prisoners. ” These basic needs included food and clothes to be provided without charge, individual cells for the prisoners and the reduction of shared cells. They proposed hiring salaried staff such as doctors and chaplains, as well as the guards. Finally, segregation by age, sex and type and severity of offence. These changes aimed to stop the extortion of the prisoners, whilst providing safe spaces for the prisoners. This was an attempt to bring order to English prisons and a way of controlling the violence that was becoming more common between prisoners. “Of course, these standards could not be effectively implemented in prisons designed to be dungeons of punishment. Prison architecture had to change as well”.

Howard and Bentham focused particularly on surveillance and inspection of the prisoners, as the lack of had resulted in violent conditions and further crimes committed within the prisons. Bentham believed that constant surveillance was the answer to reduce the dangerous activity that was taking over the prison, whilst at the same time preventing this.

Essay on Why Should Felons Be Allowed to Vote

According to Martin Luther King Jr. “No nation can long continue to flourish or to find its way to a better society while it allows any one of its citizens to be denied the right to participate in the most fundamental of all privileges-the right to vote”. A prisoner, who is also referred to as an inmate, is anyone who is deprived of liberty against their will and can be lawfully confined or unlawfully confined (Justice and peace commission, 2011). The right to vote is universal and equal, it is the right of every citizen that has reached 18 years of age to vote and be elected regardless of class, ethnicity, race, economic or other affiliation (voting Rights). Prisoners should be allowed to vote because they are still considered to be citizens of the country in addition, if this right is taken away it dehumanizes these individuals.

Prisoners are still considered to be citizens of a country and as such should be given the right to vote. Is an act against the law whether unwillingly or unwillingly grounds to revoke citizenship? While prisoners can lose certain luxuries of freedom, it does not mean that they are no longer citizens. As voting is a basic right of all citizens in a country, prisoners should be allowed to vote. According to (Duff, 2014) a convicted offender does not lose their citizenship as committing a crime is not an exercise of citizenship and hence should not be prevented from accessing their basic right- the right to vote. It is written in the constitution that it is the right of every citizen of Jamaica to be registered to vote (The Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedom- Constitutional Amendment- Act, 2011). Why then should prisoners not be allowed to vote, they are citizens, and all citizens have the right to vote.

If the basic right to vote is taken away from prisoners, it dehumanizes them and hence they should be allowed the right to vote. Prison should not only be seen as the place where “bad people get locked up”, it should also be viewed as a place for rehabilitation. When prisoners are treated as less than humans it hinders their rehabilitation process. It seems as if prisoners become another species other than humans. Discarding the prisoners from society limits their potential to rise above the ashes of their broken lives, hence they cannot better themselves for re-admission into society (Golding, 2018). Why not use the prison to teach these individuals humility and responsibility, and help them to make positive and thoughtful choices starting with giving them an opportunity to vote?

Despite evidence to the contrary, there are some who believe that prisoners should not be given the right to vote because once an individual breaks the law they are stripped of all their rights. It is believed that if one breaks the law, they no longer have the right to be a part of any policy or law-making (Clegg & Spakovsky, 2018). So, therefore, if a person is caught stealing a remote and is unfortunately given a prison sentence for ‘breaking’ the law, he then should not vote. Another claim is that the main point of a prison sentence is to show the offender and society as a whole that criminal behavior results in the loss of freedom and most of the rights that freedom offers (Aitken, 2006).

The view that prisoners should not be allowed to vote is rigid and partial for the following reasons: Denying prisoners the right to vote does not protect the public and is therefore an unwarranted infringement upon the human rights of prisoners (Should prisoners be allowed to vote, 2011). If a person who is in prison casts a vote he/she does not cause any harm to any person. It is not like they robbed a bank or shot a person in the foot. Being able to vote is a harmless act and so prisoners should not be denied the such right. Many persons believe that some acts of violence deserve punishment by death, but he who is without sin cast the first stone. Being locked away, and having luxury pleasures taken away from them is enough punishment for prisoners. Prisoners are not the only ones who will vote in an election, why not give them a chance to make at least one good decision?

The facts have been clearly stated, prisoners should be allowed the right to vote. Being in prison does not take away from the fact that those individuals are still citizens and hence should be awarded such a basic right. If a person should vote from inside a prison it will bring no harm to the outside world and therefore should not be denied such a right. If a person can argue that prisoners should be kept locked away and stripped of any and all rights and basic privileges how then, can they be rehabilitated and have any chance of re-entering society? Give them chance to vote and see it do more good than harm.

Essay on Why Prisoners Should not Be Allowed to Vote

Should prisoners retain their right to vote?

Stewart in his article “Terrorism and Human Rights” defined human rights as the essential rights and freedoms that belong to each person within the world, from birth until death. They apply despite where you’re from, what you suspect, or how you select to measure your life. They will never be got rid of, although they will sometimes be restricted – for instance, if someone breaks the law, or is within the interests of national security. These basic rights are supported by shared values like dignity, fairness, equality, respect, and independence. These values are defined and guarded by law. The history of our nation is fought with battles over its people’s rights, and therefore the right to vote is one of the foremost among them. The right to vote is linked to several other significant rights and principles that of equality and justice. It should be denied to people who have infringed on the right of others.

There is really no polite way to say this so here’s the thing; they’re put behind bars because they committed an offense against the law and thus are dangerous to society. From rapists to murderers to thieves. In reality, these prisons keep all and within the process make the country safer to live in after you break the law, you’ve got no business enjoying the rights that will otherwise be at your disposal had the crime not been committed. Anyone that breaks the law doesn’t have the country’s best interests at heart. In reality, how can such people be allowed to vote? Yes, people do change, and frequently when someone shows an improvement in their behavior, their sentence is typically reduced, in fact, reckoning on the crime they committed. If the state believes someone has reformed to the extent that they will be trusted to measure with others again, they’re unleashed from prison then the person can have their rights again (Ntusi, 2002).

I’m not advocating for an inhumane criminal justice system, but their lock-up attributed to poor decisions that led to chaotic actions. They got themselves into that mess in order that they should get themselves and behave well to serve a lighter sentence. I completely agree that prisoners have to be compelled to be educated because after they finally get out, they will be beneficial to society rather than being idle and disorderly. On the other hand, letting prisoners vote is devaluing the country. It’s funny to mention that denying a prisoner an opportunity to vote may be a violation of human rights. Although some prisoners don’t seem to be necessarily evil when behind bars, they’re not a part of the citizens who will demand full rights. We simply shouldn’t tamper with our judiciary.

As I’ve already argued, prisons have to be compelled to reform and rehabilitate their inmates to really cut crime. People have to be compelled to understand that there are consequences to committing against the law. It doesn’t depart unpunished. Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time. And after you do time, don’t expect your rights to be considered because when the crime was being committed, the one responsible didn’t consider anything. This can be something we look deep into; this can be something that may keep us up at night (Briant, 2011). After all, prisons are for separation and rehabilitation, not pampering them with rights. While crime is perpetrated by individuals, the impact is on society at large. Crime is expensive costing taxpayers–and the government–billions of dollars each year. At the same time, the number of time and resources allocated to court trials takes a lot from time spent on community productivity, and none of this takes into consideration the very fact that crime is hurtful to its victims. Also, when you consider the additional amount of money they will have to allocate to pay election workers will just not be worth it to persons who have already put the country in a negative light. As such, it doesn’t seem right that convicts who have such an in-depth negative impact on the social order should be allowed to be a part of the decision-making process that contributes therefore to order. In violating the accord by committing a crime, convicts are relinquishing their privilege of participating in the forming of societal policy (Stewart, 2018).

The threat of jail time isn’t necessarily enough of a deterrent to those with a criminal streak, as evidenced by the number of repeat offenders who return to jail (45% within five years of release). Jail may be a loss of freedom, and this threat is enhanced when it includes the loss of democratic rights similarly. While some may argue that convicts are mostly indifferent to losing the right to vote, the message may be a societal one the maximum amount as a private one: Criminal behavior is intolerable, and losing your most simple right is quarry as a punishment. Crime is a societal problem and voting is a societal privilege. Having prisoners participate in voting will cost taxpayers more money which would be deemed unreasonable as they have forfeited the right to vote by breaking the law.

Works Cited

1. STEWART, DAVID P. TERRORISM, AND HUMAN RIGHTS: THE PERSPECTIVE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW. Middle East Institute, 2018, www.jstor.org/stable/resrep19954. Accessed 2 Feb. 2020.
2. Ntusi Mbodla. “Should Prisoners Have a Right to Vote?” Journal of African Law, vol. 46, no. 1, 2002, pp. 92–102. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/4141323. Accessed 2 Feb. 2020.
3. Briant, Sophie. “THE REQUIREMENTS OF PRISONER VOTING RIGHTS: MIXED MESSAGES FROM STRASBOURG.” The Cambridge Law Journal, vol. 70, no. 2, 2011, pp. 279–282. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41300961. Accessed 2 Feb. 2020.
4. Easton, Susan, et al. “Should Prisoners Be Allowed to Vote?” Criminal Justice Matters, vol. 90, no. 1, 2012, pp. 43–44., doi:10.1080/09627251.2012.751247.
5. a. Plato was a Greek ancient philosopher, he lived in the city of Athens in Greece. He represented the classical period, 428 – 347 BC.
6. b. He is known for his most work, the Republic, and is also famous for his dialogues (early, middle and late).
7. c. What I know about these works is that the republic details a wise society run by a philosopher while the dialogues showcase his metaphysical theory of forms – something else he is well known for.
8. d. His contribution to literary criticism is
9. F. Yes, Plato in his Academy founded a complex theory of literary criticism that initiated the debate, still ongoing, on the value, nature, and worth of the artist and literature itself.

Critical Evaluation of the Functions of and Concerns around Prisons

The image most individuals have of prison comes from how they are depicted in the media and reports. Prisons are often presented as violent institutions that are dangerous for the staff and inmates (Coyle, 2005). It is important to consider the origins and history behind prisons in order to understand what the prison’s key purpose was and how that has developed through the years. Prison after the nineteenth century had a more rehabilitative approach to the inmates that were incarcerated. Before this, however, prisons were primarily used to hold a prisoner until it was decided how he or she would be dealt with by those above them in the law, such as executing them or having them pay compensation for the crimes they committed (Wilson, 2014).

The key function of prisons in society is to hold people remanded in custody by the courts, hold sentenced offenders, maintain proper conditions for those that are in custody, prepare inmates for release and attempt to rehabilitate offenders (Davies, et al., 2015). This means that prisons have a mix of people who are already serving long and short sentences, as well as people waiting for trial in order to receive a sentence. As well as rehabilitating offenders prisons can be viewed as a form of punishment for offenders. The prison also acts as a place where dangerous individuals are kept in order to make society a safer place for the community.

Over the years prison reform has attempted to ensure that prisoners are taken care of adequately within the prison. There have been some developments to make prisons more accommodating like prison schemes that help inmates earn some qualifications and overcome drug and alcohol addictions. Despite these schemes being introduced to many prisons, according to (Dick Whitfield, 1991) there has not been much prison reform. Whitfield described entering the prison as a step back in time (Dick Whitfield, 1991) and suggested that the structures of prisons have not changed much over time. The concept of control and security have remained in prisons since their creation and prisoners are still expected to follow a strict set of rules. Although inmates have access to healthy food, proper healthcare, and daily exercise, overcrowding rates mean that the conditions prisoners often live in are poor. Cells designed for one inmate are often occupied by two or sometimes three prisoners which means the inmates do not get any time alone, have a lack of privacy and are often claustrophobic for the inmate. It also means that they are often forced to share toilets, and showers and in some cases, during lockdowns, they are required to eat three meals a day in these confined spaces (Coyle, 2005). This can lead to prisoners developing health issues due to a lack in space for them to move around in as well as developing mental health issues. In 1989, The Home Office rebuilt Feltham prison to create better-living conditions for the prisoners and to create a closer relationship with the staff and inmates.

Prison as a rehabilitating program has been unsuccessful. A study conducted in 2018 found that adults that serve a sentence of less than 12 months were found to re-offend at a rate of 64.6% compared to adults that served a sentence of more than 12 months, where the reoffending rate was 29.9% (London, 2018). This suggests that people serving a short sentence do not see prison as a deterrent to crime because of how short their sentence is. They can complete the time required in prison and then return to society and continue committing crimes. The offender may also come in contact with prisoners that have committed similar crimes but on more serious levels. They could use this connection when they leave prison to meet people that would enable them to commit further crimes that would result in their imprisonment. Due to the duration of shorter prison sentences, the individual may not be given any rehabilitating help. This means they may be placed in prison for the purpose of punishment rather than rehabilitation. The rate of reoffending amongst juvenile offenders has decreased to 38.4%. (Justice, 2019) The reason for this decrease could be that more schemes have been created in order to help young children from underprivileged backgrounds keep away from a life of crime. The creation of the Anti-Social Behaviour Order has been used as a deterrent of crime for young people as well as more police focus on at-risk youths (Sadler, 2008). This would place more focus on young people and ensure that they are staying in school and living in safe environments. Underprivileged children are vulnerable to resulting to a life of crime because they may lack the economic resources to have a good education or help provide for their family, so ensuring that they are given equal opportunities could help reduce the number of juvenile offenders. This would be an effective form of rehabilitation as opposed to prison because it would support young people whereas prison may not. The reoffending rates pose a concern because one of the key features of prison is rehabilitating offenders so that they stop committing crimes once they leave the institution. The reoffending rates suggest that this is not the case which implies the prison is not fulfilling its function of acting as a deterrent to crime.

A prison is viewed as overcrowded when the population of the inmates exceeded the number of prisoners the prison was built to hold. Certified Normal Accommodation (CNA) is the prison’s form of measuring accommodation within the prison (Berman, 2013). Overcrowding in prisons is a global issue as seen in the case of Kinsella in the state of California. The prison population was found to be twice the size it should have been which led to inefficient mental and physical health care for the prisoners (Rogan, 2012). The courts in this case found that prisoners were sometimes not given their required daily time outside for exercise, an opportunity to shower, and the right to a single toilet. The overcrowding in this prison leads to a shortage in staff to inmate ratio meaning there are not enough guards to take care of all the prisoners. Prisons that are overcrowded have also been found to have prisoners with extremely poor mental health with higher suicide rates (Esther F.J.C van Ginneken, 2016). This causes many issues for the prisoners including issues like sensory deprivation due to the fact that they are locked up for long periods of time in cells that cannot hold the capacity of prisoners inhabiting it. In England and Wales, 72 prisons which make up 57% of prisons in England and Wales were overcrowded. 9 of these prisons were found to be at 150% capacity (Berman, 2013). In some cases, the population of a prison may exceed 100% population but might not be classified as overpopulated because the CNA may not think the prison has reached its full capacity. In 20034, 21.7% of prisoners shared a cell that was initially made to inhabit one prisoner (Coyle, 2005). The rate of overcrowding raises the question of if crime is increasing. The rate of reoffending suggests that crime is not decreasing which can provide an explanation for why many prisons are overcrowded. However, there are alternate explanations for this that also need to be explored. The number of criminals compared to the number of prisons could play a big role in why many prisons are overcrowded. It takes time and money to build new prisons and with a rapid increase in crimes committed, the criminal justice system has no choice but to continue sentencing criminals to prisons already at full capacity (Joshua Guetzkow, 2015). However, a counter explanation to prison overcrowding that has already been explored by theorists such as Angela Davis in Are Prisons Obsolete (Davis, 2003) suggests that in most cases when prisons are built there is an urgency to fill them. This theory suggests that black men are often incarcerated for crimes that white men would not be in order to fill the prisons. This means that the prisons are already filled with people who have committed minor crimes when people who have committed more serious crimes are committed.

An alternative to prison is community punishment. Prisoners are locked up for long periods of the day which can be viewed as a punishment rather than rehabilitation. This could explain why some prisoners after release chose to re-offend because they did not learn that what they did was wrong and should not be done again whilst in prison. Reoffending rates for shorter prison sentences suggest that they are ineffective in rehabilitating people and reducing crime. Community punishment would ensure that the individual stays integrated into their community and teaches them the value of work as an alternative to a life of crime. The individual will also learn skills that can be transferred to a workplace environment. These skills may not be acquired in a prison setting so community punishment would be a better alternative. Another reason why community punishment may be better than prison is that it gives the induvial more structure in life and teaches them the value of earning money through legal ways. Community punishments can also help show the public that the government is actively trying to rehabilitate people and reduce crime rather than just lock them away. The Local Crime Community Sentence allows the public to share their opinion on the probation tasks given to offenders and how long they should be on probation (Allen, 2008). Including the public in community punishment schemes was proven to be effective as half of the members of the public included had originally thought the offender should go to prison but later changed their minds and voted that community punishments would be more effective in rehabilitating the offender (Allen, 2008). This is more effective than prison because it allows the public to engage with the offender instead of keeping the offender isolated away from the public. This could help the public understand why the offender committed the crime they did as well as allow the offender to understand the impact their crime had on society. A recent poll taken from Smart Justice (Hanks, 2007) found that the public believed that for non-violent crimes, especially those that were drug-related, community punishment or drug rehabilitative programs would be better than being sent to prison. This was especially the case for women of young children as neither the children nor the mother would benefit from spending time in prison apart from each other. Despite this, there are some issues with community punishment since it is not a concept widely agreed upon within the United States. Maloney et al argued probation as a brand needed to be retired (Gwen Robinson, 2013). This statement is suggesting that the concept of traditional probation is not agreed to be as useful as a prison and should be reconsidered.

Prisoners are locked up for long periods of time and deprived of many basic human rights. This can lead to poor mental health for the prisoners. If the prison staff fail to understand how poor mental health and learning difficulties can affect an inmate`s behavior it can be detrimental to their health. The healthcare in prisons has improved in recent years but there has not been a focus on mental health. A study conducted in prisons found that 64% of sentenced men and 50% of sentenced women had a personality disorder. Around 23 of the prisoners used illegal drugs in the recent years before their arrest and approximately 35 of male and 25 of female prisoners confessed to drinking alcohol on a dangerous level (Coyle, 2005). There were also high levels of drug use among prisoners, half of the prisoners confessed to having used illegal drugs whilst committing an offense to make money for more drugs. This demonstrates that many people had mental health and substance abuse issues before going to prison. 1992 and onwards there were 906 suicides committed by prisoners whilst in custody. 94 prisoners committed suicide in 2004 and of those 94, 13 were women. (Coyle, 2005) From these figures, we can conclude that there is insufficient mental health support for prisoners, especially for male prisoners. This poses as a concern due to the fact that prisoners’ mental health is likely to deteriorate when they are locked up and isolated away from their friends and family. It could be especially difficult for first-time offenders and remand prisoners as they have never experienced the prison environment and waiting on trials to decide whether they will be staying in prison for longer. In 2014, 20% of suicides committed within the prisons were by remand prisoners whereas only 14% were committed by the prisoner population (Esther F.J.C van Ginneken, 2016). This further emphasizes how vulnerable prisoners are when they first enter the prison population and the lack of mental health support they receive during this early period of incarceration. However, despite these figures, the prison system has made changes in attempts to reduce poor mental health and substance abuse issues for its prisoners. This has included educating prison staff, so they are trained and know how to prevent prisoners from self-harming. There has also been an increase in rehabilitation programs for prisoners that suffer from substance abuse. The creation of these programs has led to an 11.9% decrease in drug abuse (Coyle, 2005) which shows they have been useful. The reduction of substance abuse in prisoners can also lead to a decrease in poor mental health as the prisoners are living healthier lives. Inmates with learning difficulties are often mistreated in prisons due to prison staff having a lack of understanding of the inmate`s disability. It is common that these disabilities often go unrecognized, which can make it more difficult for inmates to understand and process what the procedure is in court, different prison regimes, or tasks assigned to them by the guards (Talbot, 2007). This poses an issue because they may be mistreated by guards in the pretense that they are behaving disobediently and could be punished. The lack of support for learning disabilities in prison would also make it difficult for the inmate to take part in rehabilitation schemes that would benefit them in the future.

To conclude, the function of a prison as a place where criminals are held can be viewed is more accurate compared to a prison as a rehabilitative institution even though the prison should primarily be a place of rehabilitation. Although there are schemes in place to help prisoners, they are not the most effective in reducing crime. However, the rehabilitation programs in place to help inmates overcome drug and alcohol addictions can be useful if they are implemented properly within the prison and made accessible. The prison would need to introduce more schemes that assist prisoners during the time they spend in prison and after their release to ensure that they do not re-offend.

Bibliography

1. Allen, R., 2008. Changing public attitudes to crime and punishment – Building confidence in community penalties. The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice, 55(4), pp. 389-400.
2. Berman, G., 2013. Prison population statistics. House of Commons Library.
3. Coyle, A., 2005. What happens inside prisons? In: Understanding Prisons: key issues in policy and practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press, pp. 104-132.