Category: Prison

Introduction

The ethical implications of Americas practice of mass incarceration and the prison industrial complex have been a topic for debate in the philosophic circles for a considerable amount of time. Used to describe a system of approaches to combat crime and solve various socioeconomic problems, these terms have overly negative connotations among the general public. An astonishingly large number of prisoners in the United States is a point of concern for both activists and regular citizens (Prison Policy Initiative, n.d.). The prison population continues to grow at an unprecedented rate, wasting government funds, and far outpacing the population increase.

There are many points of contention to discuss the current prison system, and their examination is needed to fully access the scope of the issue. The justice system that disproportionately affects racial minorities and people with disabilities creates an unjust, hostile environment (Prison Policy Initiative, n.d.). Privately owned prisons derive profit from cheap inmate labor and their poor living conditions. The ethics of in-prison treatment and the use of violence and solitary confinement are also an issue of high priority in this topic. The current system does not offer sufficient support for people to start their life again after serving the sentence, and actively destroys their ability to integrate into society. The prison-industrial complex brings harm to individuals and communities, and the benefits of this approach are highly dubious. All of these problems are well-researched and substantiated by many articles and investigations. Despite being a well-known topic, the prison system is rarely analyzed from an ethical standpoint, creating an opportunity for further discussion. This paper, in particular, will utilize a variety of viewpoints, employing a utilitarian, deontological, and relativistic approach.

Deontology

Deontology is one of the classical ethical theories that can be used to understand the problem of mass incarceration and the prison industrial complex. The term itself is used to describe a belief that actions can be determined to be good or evil following a clear set of rules (Alexander and Moore, 2016). This theory allows one to distinguish right from wrong following several universal, predetermined laws. Deontology allows one to make clear decisions without considering consequences (Alexander and Moore, 2016). This theory may not be able to analyze the peculiarities of mass incarceration and the prison industrial complex fully, but it is nevertheless interesting to utilize it. Regarding the American prison system, this theory would claim that the action of mass imprisonment is just. According to the deontological punishment theory, the use of punishment, and, by extension imprisonment is a logical practice and the requirement of justice (Bedau and Kelly, 2015). The laws of the government and the country are considered the ultimate determining factor in judging a person.

According to the rules applicable to this philosophical approach, if a person is perceived to have committed a crime, their punishment is an inevitable and necessary outcome, regardless of consequences. On the other hand, the practice of massive incarceration and increased targeting of minorities does not find a sufficient explanation in this theory. The deontological approach constitutes that people would be placed in prison proportionally for too many crimes committed, which is contradicted by the real-life imprisonment statistics (Durose, 2019). The theory is also ill-equipped at accessing how the current system harms the communities and individuals, as it cannot perceive the prison system to be flawed (Chiao, 2015). Deontology offers an incomplete look at the problem of mass incarceration and does not offer an effective way to reassess the possible solutions.

Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism is another ethical theory that can be used to evaluate the existence of the prison complex and mass incarceration. As a view, utilitarianism proposes that morally just actions present the most good to the world (Tardi, 2020). Action is understood through the lens of the result it produces, which is judged to be beneficial or detrimental (Tardi, 2020). The goal of this approach is to maximize the amount of overall good. Through the lens of utilitarianism, US prison practices can be considered morally and ethically wrong. While the existence of private-owned prisons produces good in the form of wealth and labor to their owners, it brings much more harm to society overall.

The practice of mass incarceration separates people from their communities, breaks apart families, and stops people from being an effective part of the general society. The health and well-being of prisoners are also often not taken into account, leading to lasting physical and mental problems. The government spends an ever-increasing amount of its budget on maintaining the prison industry, limiting spending on welfare and care programs. The racial profiling and targeting of disenfranchised groups bring danger to the most vulnerable parts of society. All points considered, the prison system in its current state brings benefits only to a small minority of wealthy and influential people and does not work as a rehabilitation and support structure for the country.

Relativism

Relativism is the last approach that will be used to evaluate the topic in question. The relativist approach is used to ascertain that the moral and ethical norms are largely based on the culture and beliefs of a particular society (Baghramian and Carter, 2015). Similar or same actions may be permissible or reprehensible depending on the established principles of a particular place (Baghramian and Carter, 2015). This outlook allows one to be flexible in regards to ethics and pay attention to the peculiarities of each situation. In regards to the US prison industrial complex and the practices of mass incarceration, one will need to consider the practices of American society. With the prevalence of Christianity and its influences in the history of the United States, traditional Christian values became a major part of societys consciousness. This promotes the notions of forgiveness and cooperation as integral parts of life.

The universal virtues of the American people are often identified as freedom, equality, individuality, and justice. The prison system goes against many of these intrinsic American values; therefore it can be identified as flawed or ethically incorrect. The imprisonment and mistreatment of people contradict the notions of equality and freedom, restricting people both mentally and physically. The prison industrial complex that promotes discrimination against the poor prisoners is also ethically wrong in this assessment since their exploitation works to increase the wealth gap between the classes of American society. The currently established procedure for identifying and punishing criminals does not work in tandem with the common virtues of the nation and subjects people to unnecessary suffering. Massive numbers of people incarcerated under the law do not portray a just system that mirrors the values of its people.

Conclusion

Taking everything into account, the various ethical approaches presented an interesting outlook on the topic of Mass Incarceration and the Prison Industrial Complex in the US. The prison system affects a massive number of people, both directly and indirectly. The system of determining who deserves to be punished is flawed, resulting in disproportional outcomes and a lack of justice. The inmates suffer from dehumanization and abuse, having trouble integrating back into the community. Not every ethical approach is well equipped to consider all of the nuances of this system, but many of them, nevertheless, allow one to evaluate separate aspects of it. Deontology considers the practice of imprisonment to be ethically right if it is proportional to the number of crimes committed, and accurately reflects the racial composition of the society. Since American prisons are unable to deliver such outcomes, this theory is unable to meaningfully analyze their existence.

Utilitarianism allows evaluating the benefit of the practice based on the amount of overall good it delivers, which puts both the mass incarceration and the prison industrial complex in a bad light. The existence and prevalence of private prisons are valuable only to their owners and investors, not the general community. Lastly, the relativist approach also presents the prison system as ethically wrong. If the moral standards of a society are based on historic and cultural norms when the operation of the prison system contradicts the major values of the American people. The notions of liberty, equality, and justice are all not being followed through in the prison industry.

References

Chiao, V. (2015). Mass Incarceration and the Theory of Punishment.Criminal Law and Philosophy, 11(3), 431452. Web.

Durose, O. (2019). The Growth of Incarceration in the United States: Leaving Proportionality Behind.Undergraduate Journal of Politics and International Relations, 2(1), 1. Web.

United States profile. (n.d.). Prison Policy Initiative. Web.

Bedau, H. A., & Kelly, E. (2015). Punishment. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Web.

Baghramian, M., & Carter, J. A. (2015). Relativism. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Web.

Alexander, L., & Moore, M. (2016). Deontological Ethics. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Web.

Tardi, C. (2020). Utilitarianism Defined. In Investopedia. Web.

Many people would not dispute the fact that prisons are created for different purposes. For instance, punishment and rehabilitation are the most significant ones. Some may assume that prisons have only one goal, which is either punishment or rehabilitation. Arguably, jails should serve all purposes for prisoners regarding the severity of the crime that they committed. Punishment includes retribution for crimes against society, depriving criminals of their freedom, and incapacitation which refers to the removal of criminals from the community. Meanwhile, rehabilitation activities involve giving educational classes in jail, training job skills, and treatment services with a psychologist or social worker, and are designed to change criminals into law-abiding citizens.

One of the most commonly applied types of punishment for a convicted offender is imprisonment and deterrence. Prison was a saving grace for some offenders, pushing them to change their criminal behavior and make apologies for their crimes. In this context, the punishment model is justified to prevent the crime from occurring again. Moreover, in some jails, conditions are terrifying; thus, ordinary citizens may accept that prisons are terrible places and, as a result, be aware of committing the crime. According to the statistics, the awareness of jails eventually had a minor influence on the number of inmates because the proportion of US residents who are in prison fell 15%, from 506 sentenced prisoners in 2008 to 431 in 2018 per 100,000 US residents (Carson, 2020, p. 1). Thus, the US local authorities achieve a decrease in crimes through deterrence and discipline, even in small amounts.

On the other hand, punishment through depriving and incapacitation may cause serious health issues due to the horrendous condition in jails. This situation may lead to prison riots, difficulties with rehabilitation, and policy implications such as financial losses and societal rejection and hate. For instance, Maruschak (2015) mentioned that half of state and federal prisoners and local jail inmates reported ever having a chronic condition. Chronic conditions include cancer, high blood pressure, stroke-related problems, diabetes, heart-related problems, kidney-related problems, arthritis, asthma, and cirrhosis of the liver (p. 1). Additionally, rehabilitation with punishment is one of the worst ideas that had ever occurred because penalties may reduce some symptoms. Still, they would never correct the original issue of why a person had been seized to jail.

Therefore, if the government provides proper medical care and education for prisoners, the number of crimes may decrease considerably. Snell (2014) claimed that four states (California, Florida, Texas, and Pennsylvania) held more than half of all inmates on death row on December 31, 2011 (p. 1). Thus, punishment may cause a positive effect on society, such as the fear of jails, as well as negative, for example, the struggle for prisoners rights regarding death and other sentences. Meanwhile, rehabilitation and education of inmates may extinguish the issue with the fight for individuals rights, and force realized prisoners to teach other humans that crime committing is not worth striving.

In conclusion, in light of the information mentioned above, the US government has not decreased the number of offenses and crimes considerably. Statistics prove that there was a minor reduction of the US residents in prisons, and, still, those are the minor amounts. Therefore, in order to prevent illegal activities, even more, the authorities should provide not only deterrence but also proper medical treatment and education regarding the severity of the prisoners crime.

References

Carson, E. A. (2020). Prisoners in 2018. U.S. Department of Justice.

Maruschak, L. M. (2015). Medical Problems of State and Federal Prisoners and Jail Inmates, 201112. U.S. Department of Justice.

Snell, T. L. (2014). Capital Punishment, 2011  Statistical Tables. U.S. Department of Justice.

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to give legislators recommendation for the new bill that seeks to increase the term by double for criminals sentenced for armed robbery. Despite the state legislature argument that the bill is popular the prime question should be will the bill act as a deterrent to armed robberies? It is hard to conclude on the right recommendation in a society that believes on the adage that do the crime, do the time.

The effectiveness of the bill if it passes into law is hard to define if it will deter crime to offenders and potential offenders. Robbery is a crime of stealing by use of threats or force. It is also referred to as larceny. Where the offender uses a weapon inflicting injury on the victim the offender is charged as armed robbery or aggravated robbery (Schmalleger, 2012).

Armed robbery is rampant in the United States hence becoming a major concern for the society, legislature, and criminal justice system. Armed robbery is punished as a capital offense; however, sentencing is depended on several variables such as state laws and procedures, past crime record, if state has diversion program or even if there are any sentencing improvements.

This bill should seek to address crime reduction is the United States and not just a bill to deter crime. The bill will get to root cause of crime and project where crime is headed today in the United States of America. Research might bring secondary solutions that might help curb the situation and have outcomes that are more successful (Schmalleger, 2012).

In many states, the out practice has discouraged habitual crime but in others, it has had no effect. For instance, in Lincoln, Nebraska there are several inmates with more than five hundred arrests. In other states, habitual criminals spend years in prison only to get out and commit yet another crime ending up in prison again.

Although there is no warranty that this bill once passed into law will deter crime however, there are recommendations that once implemented can be of use to both society and criminals.

A strict code of conduct should be set for the convicted and those who follow and demonstrate ability to live by it once but there can be released. These procedures include behaviour modification, vocation training and education, counseling, work experience, proper nutrition and exercise. These procedures will ensure that convicts are rehabilitated rather than being incarcerated.

The rehabilitation methods to be proposed in this bill include behaviour modification, training, education and vocation, work experience and proper nutrition and exercise. In some places where rehabilitation has been implemented it had failed due to lack of cogent method of implementation.

Presently, many prisoners just eat, watch TV, lift weights, and do little work. Many spent their time in the cold cells. The question that remains in many peoples minds what is the fete of those who will eventually be released. What is the recidivism rate of the prisoners if convicted? This bill should address these major goals (Schmalleger, 2012).

To many citizens and members of the state legislature, the bill should pass the clean bill of health. In the society, robbery criminals should perish in prison cells without light of the day. However, the prime goal of every judicial system and prison system is to correct and rehabilitate the convicts into good citizens so that once they are out they can serve their country patriotically. The theory and adage that do crime more time is retrogressive and time barred.

The disparity in judicial sentencing in the judicial system. This disparity is variations and equities resulting when convicted of same crime are given different sentences whether in the same State or in a different state (Schmalleger, 2012).

This disparity is unfair. There should be equal sentence for same crime. The judicial system should thus create a scorecard that is to be used when delivering sentences. This score should cut across all states and all judges. In this respect, I would wish the bill to accommodate the recommendation that all crimes receive same punishment.

Probation is allows an offender to get another chance. It can be given in addition to the normal jail term. It allows an offender to join his community with supervision from his/her probation officer. The probation officer sets the terms such as classes, curfews, and monitoring.

This is a well thought out recommendation, as it is not every offender is a repeat offender (Schmalleger, 2012). We cannot lay a blanket judgement that all are capable of doing a repeat offense that is what this bill seeks to achieve. Where a first time offender gets double maximum prison term by just committing their first crime, this will seem like the system doesnt want them o prove themselves. This is not a good point on part of the offender.

Parole is a recommendation where an offender sentenced to jail has the ability to get another chance of redeeming himself. It involves amnesty to those who have displayed good habits and frequently reports to the authority (Schmalleger, 2012).This recommendation will help in cutting down tax payers money spend on offenders besides giving offenders room for reformation and correction to patriotic citizens. In this regard, the bill should not pass the clean bill of health on the floor of the house.

Reference

Schmalleger, F. (2012). Criminology today: An integrative introduction. (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Introduction

The French philosopher, Michel Foucault, also being a social theorist, historian and critic, was one of the most influential critical thinkers of the 20^th century. His philosophical theories address the issues of power and how it is used in controlling social systems, knowledge, and how knowledge equally controls power. His theories are popular up to date in the academic arena; he is among the most influential postmodern philosophers (Michel 12).

There are various books written by Foucault; one of them is Birth of the Clinic which was published in 1963. The main theme of the book is the struggle that people lead against those who have power in the society, in other words, against wealthy and influential people. The main concern of Foucault consists in the way technology has influenced quest for power among the ruling class in the society, and also the reason as to why the society is violating the rules of government.

In the book, Discipline and Punishment, Foucault focuses on the issues of domination and power. He expresses how the elite dominate the less fortunate memebers of the society by means of their power and influence. He shows how negative societal rules have damaged human moral norms, as well as the oppresing role the government plays. Foucaults views on prisons and psychiatric hospitals are clearly evident in his books The History of Madness published in 1961, and in Discipline and Punish that was published 14 years later, in 1975.

The latter book was created in a Parisian hospital. Foucault expresses strong dislike and anger in regards to what in his view was moral hypocrisy in modern psychiatry (Foucault 265). Branding mad people as mentally ill who are in need of medical treatment does not offer any medical solution. This concept was developed during the 17^th -18^th centuries and did not offer any amicable solution, rather it gave the perception that madness is a course of nature.

Foucault viewed the previous controlling methods and exclusionary practices on mad people and lepers as a form of institutionalizing unreasonable members of the society. The current treatment does not have any significance in terms of change. Treatments, such as the use of straitjacket and freezing showers are applied until the victim internalizes the pattern of judgment and punishment (Foucault 265).

Foucault was striving to make a reform according to which punishmesnt of a criminal would be more humane, instead of torture and imprisonment along with other practices that were being conducted at that time. Emphasis is made on how effective this alternative methods are compared to the other ones; it has a positive approach that tends to be effective.

He viewed prison systems of forced discipline and constant supervision as the reasons to cause the instances of broken will of a prisoner, making a him/her a docile body, which is easy to control by those in authority. According to Foucault, prisons did not meet their objective of punishing the criminal nor reducing crime (Foucault 265).

The existence of prisons that are seemingly not solving the problems of crime in the society is benefitial to the ruling class (Foucault 265). Criminality is believed to be used by the ruling class to prevent any conformation or civil uprise that may come up. According to Foucault, the lower class groups commit crimes in order to show rebellion against the social elite and the social systems (Foucault 276).

Foucault sees prison system as a failure because it is used by those in power to continue oppressing the poor or those who advocate for change. His views consisted in the fact that either people resist and refuse the societal discipline and are labeled as criminals, or submit to it at the expense of loss of their identity (Foucault 277).

Is God Dead?

The term God has different meanings for different people. Some would define God as a single deity and a supernatural creator of the universe and humans; some get a notion of the God as a being that is supreme, omnipotent, omnipresent and independent. A God incidentally refers to a being that is mythical worshiped in a religion; on the other hand, others term God as science.

Most people believe that a supreme being is in control of the creation of the universe, while others do not believe that God exists; such believes are characterized by an individual faith that he/she possesses.

Religious people, no matter what religion they belong to, believe in the existence of God, while atheists oppose the claims of the existence of a supernatural and supreme being. Both groups believe either in the existence or non-existence of God (Bruce 269). As times and cultures change, the issues of spirituality and belief also take a consecutive turn.

Friedrich Nietzsche through his works made a declaration that God is dead; this phrase though leads to a lot of misunderstanding. Many have misinterpreted the phrase to mean the end of God or a literal death of God. His phrase pointed out to the reliance of the western world on religion as a source of meaning. Nietzsches works express the concern about the rising atheism, religion decline and the deficiency of a moral authority.

Nietzsche in his work emphasizes that the absence of a higher moral authority could cause the world to plunge into chaos. Nietzsche explains the phrase in terms of God being dead in the heart of a modern man. The dead God, he explains, is a resultant effect of science and rationalism. Some critics and philosophers, however, make claims that humanity does not need a higher divine authority so as to live a morally good life.

A cover story in the Time News Magazine entitled Is God Dead? on April 8 1966, highlighted the concerns of various philosophers and theologians in Gods role in a world that is increasingly becoming secular. The highlight from the article that 97% of Americans believed in God shows how most individuals still have acknowledgement for God, although 27% of the Americans said that they were deeply religious.

The modern society has witnessed less acknowledgement of God in the society. The modern society progressively appears to become more secular than before. God is being abandoned by people in their daily life because of modern science that eliminats the need for the religion to give an explanation of the natural world. Nietzsches fears of moral degradation and a godless society is food for thought for everyone.

Wether there is God or not is a big question that is still in debate; the best way to answer it is by acknowledging that there is a supreme being that created the universe. It does not matter what religious beliefs one has, we must appreciate the fact that religion is the source of life and power that drive us day in, day out. The assumption that there is no superior being should be discarded based on the fact that a superior being exists since it is he, who created us.

Works Cited

Bruce, Steve. God Is Dead: Secularization in the West. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub, 2002. Print

Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon Books, 1977. Print.

Foucault, Michel, and Jean, Khalfa. History of Madness. London: Routledge, 2006. Print.

Friedrich, Nietzsche. God is Dead: Philosophy-index, 2002. Web. <http://www.philosophy-index.com/nietzsche/god-is-dead/>.

Michel, Foucault. Michel Foucault: (1926-1984). Farmington Hills, MI: Gale, 2003. Print

When a criminal or an accused is conscious of the fact that he will not be given a pardon or be found not guilty at the end of his trial, his thoughts most often turn towards escaping from the prison that could become his home for life or the harbinger of his death. In the discussions Crito had with Socrates, we can clearly see that Socrates was not going to be set free from the shackles that bound him and yet he chose to remain in prison and face death rather than escape even though an opportunity presented itself. Crito, a fellow prisoner who had found an opportunity to escape was trying to convince the latter to join him in his quest for forced freedom. In the end though, Socrates ended up presenting convincing scenarios to Crito which proved that his decision to not escape would be the more logical and informed course of action. This decision of his was a puzzlement to Crito who had to listen to his reasons for not escaping but rather, facing whatever consequences of his action existed. Socrates was right to remain in prison instead of escaping because of a number of reasons, 5 of which I will discuss within this paper.

To begin with Socrates, being the philosopher that he was, knew that escape is nothing but a panic mechanisim that could make an already bad situation worse. Rather than panicking and trying to escape, he chose to rationalize and think about the actions and courses of events that led to his current situation. Being a man who believed and supported all that the government of Athens stood for, he was not going to be the one to falter from his beliefs and faith in the state and its citizens (in terms of justice and fairness) just because things did not turn out in his favor. Rather, he would show his support and agreement with their decision by staying in jail and awaiting his fate.

Another reason that Socrates presented quite clearly to Crito was the fact that a fugitive from the law is a selfish person, for he did not consider the effects of his actions on the people around him. His family, friends, acquaintances  all these people will be placed in jeopardy all because he did not choose to follow the law of the land. They too would become fugitives and be hounded by the law because these are the very people whom the fugitive would turn to and beg for help. Help that he will most likely receive because of the affinity they feel for him. However, by taking such actions, they too would have contributed to a problem that could cause the shaking of the very foundation of Athenian society. They themselves would have indirectly or directly broken the law by being his harbingers. If he were to take his family on the run with him, he would then be depriving his children and future heirs of their birthright to be called a citizen of Athens and enjoy all the benefits that it entailed. Those who are fugitives of the law cannot enjoy and benefits or rewards from any country that they escape to. In essence, they will all merely exist but not live, and that is no sort of life for anyone.

As with any discussion regarding justice and freedom, the religious aspect also came into view. Socratess reasoning supports the belief that man is judged twice in his life. Once by his fellowmen, perhaps for crimes committed against others, for which a corresponding punishment is meted out, and then again upon our deaths. During this time of judgment, our souls and actions while living are well scrutinized by the ultimate being and then judged as being worthy of Heaven or Hell. If one wished to go to heaven, according to Socrates, he would hedge his bets while living and do what his conscience dictates to be the right thing to do. After all, there is a belief that our conscience will never steer us wrong when it comes to making the right choices in life.

By deciding not to escape, Socrates proved another reason for his decision. He loved his country/city, regardless of how the citizens treated him. For Athens was where he was raised in consciousness and bred to believe in all that is righteous about it. As such, if he had offended or erred in his existence, then he had wronged his citizens and therefore must face the consequences. It is Socratess strong belief that laws exist for a purpose. The purpose of keeping peace and order is so that everyone can exist in harmony. Anybody who tries to counter the laws of the land is an insurgent who must be removed from society at large. If he was being viewed as one who would cause chaos in his city, then he was willing to die if only to help bring back the balance of law and order to the land.

Lastly, Crito believed that when he was born and declared a citizen of Athens, he had entered into a binding contract. A contract that dictated that he would not do anything to overturn the government or take any course of action that might lead to unrest among the citizens. For this is the city that allowed him to flourish in terms of schools of thought and life. The citizens of the land educated and shaped his beliefs nurtured him to success and allowed him to become that which he wished to become. All in exchange for his being a law-abiding citizen and nothing more. By recognizing that, he has proven his loyalty and willingness to hold up his end of the contract that he entered into on the day he became a citizen of Athens. By convincing Crito to remain in jail instead of escaping, he further upholds his belief in the laws of the land and the fact that any man, whether guilty or not, must stand trial and await his final judgment for it is only by accepting this judgment that he may be able to continue his life in the proper manner.

By choosing to remain in jail, Socrates had proven that he had infinite trust in his relationship with the citizens of Athens. He believed that they would come to a fair and honest decision regarding his legal matter. Whatever decision it was, he would accept it wholeheartedly because the citizens would not make rash and sudden decisions. Just like other justice-giving bodies of the time, theirs would be a judgment steeped in discussions of philosophy and logic.

By accepting his fate and choosing to die as a show of support for the state, Socrates will have proven to the citizens and authorities of the city that he is not their enemy but rather a pawn in a game called justice. He had proven that even though the laws of the land are flawed, it is, for all intents and purposes perfect in the sense that it will keep order and lawfulness within Athens. His death would be viewed as the act of an exemplary citizen and be accorded the proper respect by those in society who understood his philosophies. In death, he will have proven to be the bigger person and ultimate supporter of Athenian laws.

So was his decision to not join Crito in escaping the right decision for Socrates to have made? Yes. For in the mind of great philosophers and thinkers, there can be no other greater crime than to take a course of action that would adversely affect the majority of the people around them and convey the wrong message to their followers and believers. He also proved, by accepting the death penalty, that he was one of the greatest citizens to have ever lived in Athens.

The terms jail and prison refer to two different correctional facilities even though many people use them interchangeably. These two facilities have the same goals and objectives but differ in the means that they use to achieve them.

They both fall under the correctional facilities umbrella and offer different services that are meant to help offenders reform. However, many differences distinguish them. These include their mode of operation, the size of facilities, the source of funding and the length of sentence for offenders.

First, a jail is a place where people who are under lawful detention are apprehended while a prison is a place where convicted people are confined (Doak, 1999, p.29). Therefore, jails are for people who are awaiting trial for various crimes and misdemeanors while prisons are for people who have been convicted for committing crime (Doak, 1999, p.29).

In most cases, jail sentences last for less than one year. On the other hand, the length of a prison sentence is much longer than a jail sentence and may be even for a lifetime. Once convicted, a felon may serve a sentence that may range from a few months to several years.

Secondly, jails and prisons differ in the number of amenities they offer. Jails have fewer amenities compared to prisons because they confine offenders for short periods of time (Doak, 1999, p.30). Examples of amenities provided for people in jail include food, safety, clothing and housing.

Some jails offer additional amenities such as work release programs and vocational services to help offenders deal with personal problems such as drug and substance abuse. In contrast, prisons offer a greater variety of amenities to offenders.

These amenities include work release programs, recreation, vocational training, entertainment facilities, housing, food and clothing (Doak, 1999, p.30). These amenities are important because most inmates spend a greater portion of their life in prison.

Thirdly, prisons and jails differ in their source of funding. Jails often have limited funding because they are managed by counties and cities while prisons have more funding because they are managed by the state or federal government (Kelly, 1999, p.35).

Jails have fewer and smaller facilities and can only hold a limited number of people. Prisons have larger facilities and confine more people because they receive more funding. A prison holds more people than a jail does and the prisoners are grouped based on the type of crime they were convicted for (Kelly, 1999, p.35). This is measure is undertaken as a safety precaution because some prisoners are extremely dangerous.

Fourthly, the facilities found in prisons are larger and more tightly secured unlike in jails where facilities are smaller and less tightly secured (Kelly, 1999, p.38). In countries that allow capital punishment, prisons have facilities to perform capital punishment in addition to special housing facilities for these prisoners.

In contrast, jails lack capital punishment facilities and prisoners are not segregated as they are in prisons. Prisons are tightly secured to prevent escapes and violence between the different groups of prisoners (Kelly, 1999, p.38). In addition, prison staff is specially trained in order to be able to handle prisoners without confrontations.

In conclusion, the primary difference between a jail and a prison is their jurisdiction and the length of sentences served by offenders. Jails are managed by local authorities and are used to confine offenders for less than one year. In contrast, prisons are managed by the state and are used to detain convicted offenders with long sentences.

References

Doak, M. (1999). Crime Prisons and Jails. Philadelphia: Gale Publishers.

Kelly, Z. (1999). Correctional Facilities. New York: Rourke Publishing Group.

Private prisons in the United States are the prisons that are owned and manned by private corporations, while being funded by the government. These prisons started way back in the 1840s and continue to be operational today since the government finds it cost-effective to relegate some of the prisons to the private sector. This paper covers a brief history of the origin of the American private prisons and the race disparities in them.

Terrell Hutton, the founder of CoreCivic, a for-profit prison corporation, was in charge of a large cotton plantation in the United States of America. Black convicts there would be forced to harvest cotton daily with no pay. During this period, Terrells family lived on this plantation and had a black convict who served as an unpaid houseboy. By then, most farms in the South were prisons. Inmates in most states with plantations were given whips and guns to impose pain and torture on convicts who could not achieve their labor quotas (Welch et al. 64). Terrell became so excellent in running farms in Texas, that Arkansas hired him to manage their offender institutions, which consisted majorly of plantations. Terrell ran orchards, which were the penitentiary system, at some profit to that state. His achievements brought massive income to the state and attracted two prominent businesspersons who brought new ideas. These ideas included creating a corporation to run farms and offering shares for sale at the stock market.

Privatization of prisons started long ago; for example, Louisiana began its privatization of state confinement in 1844, which was only nine years after its start. Ward, Hutton, and Pratt used inmates in the jail to produce clothes for slaves. They used to run them as factories since labor was readily available from the inmates. After privatization, jail owners put away all aspects of rehabilitation and adopted cruel tyranny with profit-making in mind. Consistently over time, the annual penitentiary report gave no information on restoration, inmate violence, or inmate security; instead, they emphasized on the profitability of the penitentiaries.

Private prisons focus more on making profit rather than rehabilitating inmates. Due to the high cost of running jails in the United States, which keeps increasing yearly, the government saw fit to privatize the sector to reduce taxpayer load on its citizens. Indeed, the operational cost of private prisons is much lower than that of public ones. However, these private corporations make profits from the service they offer to the government, yet they operate at very low cost (Welch et al. 68). Consequently, the effectiveness and efficiency of the non-public institutions has been questioned. There have been numerous claims of race disparity in most of privatized confinements, and the victims of this disparity have been majorly people of color.

In the recent past, the number of black inmates housed by privatized detentions has increased. According to Hallet, the population shot up by about 37%, accounting for around 8% of all prisoners in the United States (59). Latinos and African Americans account for up to 30% of the countrys population and up to 60% of the prisoners population (Hallett 59). Research by the University of California shows that, after their sentence, most African Americans are likely to serve their jail time at private prisons (Burkhardt 281). Over the years, these denationalized corporations have shown to have alarming recidivism rates, violence, and low levels of educational programs and health care compared to public prisons (Burkhardt 282). The study carried out in nine states compared the number of Hispanic or black inmates in private and public jails. The number of black offenders in confinement in the research states was much higher in non-public jails than in those owned by the government.

Different researchers took it upon themselves to determine various claims raised on conduct of non-public jails. A report by Petrella on race disparity bought more questions on the cost-efficiency theory preached by the privatized jails (Burkhardt 286). It demonstrated the adverse effect on African Americans and other people of color due to adoption of these policies. The study also pointed out a connection between race and inmate age. These for-profit confinements not only house large numbers of people of color, but also accommodate deficient levels of aged inmates who are generally whites in the overall inmate population. They also have low numbers of aged inmates to avoid medical expenses which generally tend to increase for people above the age of 50 (Burkhardt 286). This indicates the non-public sector in the prison market prioritizes profits rather than rehabilitation. The effect of the priority leads to deplorable detention conditions and alarming levels of incarceration, yet the crime level decreases.

The war on drugs has caused an alarming incarceration level among African Americans and Latinos of young age. This has, in turn, led to the introduction of harsh sentencing rules and compulsory minimums that have inequitably affected the African American society for over forty years. In 2009, The Bureau of justice showed that 33% of detainees where young whites while 44.2% where aged 50 above (Hatry et al. 196). Thus, by preferring to house young prisoners, these private prisons deliberately fail to sentence white prisoners. This explains how for-profit jails end up boarding younger African Americans and Latinos than public prisons.

For-profit prisons constantly claim that their efficient programs lead to the low operating costs as compared to public prisons. On the contrary, data show that these detentions do not save through the claimed efficiency but, by selecting healthy inmates. By choosing a specific profile of offenders, these privatized institutions are just like schools that only recruit excellent performing schools, and there is no basis for efficiency. Due to the profile of the offenders they chose, there is race disparity and in turn inmates of color end up being subjected to misery in the for-profit penitentiaries.

Works Cited

Burkhardt, Brett C. Private Prisons in Public Discourse: Measuring Moral Legitimacy. Sociological Focus, vol. 47, no. 4, 2018.

Hallett, Michael A. Private Prisons in America. University of Illinois Press, 2017.

Hatry, Harry et al. Comparison of Privately and Publicly Operated Corrections Facilities in Kentucky and Massachusetts. Privatizing Correctional Institutions, 2017.

Welch, Michael. Book Review: Corrections & Collections: Architectures for Art and Crime. International Criminal Justice Review, vol. 27, no. 3, 2017.

Prisons are rehabilitation institutions for individuals who have been put in custody by the court or criminals convicted of their crimes. Crime is committed daily, and those guilty are convicted in the courts of law. However, today state prisons have larger populations than they should. Penitentiaries are extremely overcrowded, which is contrary to the prison rules. The leading cause of overcrowding in prisons is sentencing offenders who have committed petty crimes.

To reduce overcrowding in the prisons, legislators should assess the prison conditions to see the high populations that are in the jails. By conducting an assessment, they get to learn the kind of laws they should make to reduce prison overcrowding. There is also a need for legislators to review some of the statutes regarding the punishment of offenders. Prisons are to be only for medium and high-risk offenders and not low-risk offenders.

Strict laws do not deter offenders from committing crimes. On the contrary, these laws accelerate the rate of offenses. Today because of the strict regulations, prison institutions are places where an offender learns new crimes. So a petty offender gets out and starts to commit a felony.

The citizens have a right to know what these strict laws are all about, whether these laws violate or promote human rights, so that they can act when the states come with laws against the rights of humans and prisoners. Furthermore, if the legislatures implement new regulations regarding imprisonment, then the prisons should hold a maximum of 70 percent of the capacity. It thus makes it efficient in the rehabilitation process of these offenders.

Legislators should monitor prison capacity to ensure that they do not exceed the required population. Therefore, it implies that the legislators have to decide how to punish petty offenders. These offenders deserve a community sentence, while offenders who have committed felonies deserve a prison sentence.

Introduction

The number of legal cases involving young adult offenders aged between 18 to 25 years has been on the rise (Harvey 6). Although the journey of these young male offenders to adulthood is inseparable from their earlier experiences, it is a paramount stage in their lives with its vital avenue of influence. If this group of youth is helped to move successfully to adulthood, it is most likely to desist from committing further offenses and become better people in their communities. Young male offenders need to be incarcerated in an environment that will support their positive social, physical, and psychological development.

Importance of Separate Confinement

When young male adults are imprisoned together with adult prisoners, they may not achieve the desired behavioral change. In adult prisons, the young prisoners face various challenges that sometimes make their behaviors even worse. While some of them learn more tactics of conducting crimes from the older inmates, others go through mistreatments such as sexual assault and physical torture, among other challenges (Harvey 131). In prisons confining young adults only, there are specific policies, services, and educational/therapeutic programs that mainly address specific developmental maturity and needs of the youth. Besides, the young offenders have many incentives for encouraging them to change their deviant behavior. The institutions foster autonomy, socially approved values, and norms mentoring and eventually facilitating behavioral changes among the young inmates as well as offering them a conducive environment for positive development (Kolivoski and Shook 1247). The young male offenders are also taught how to counter their negative self-images. Prisons confining adults and young inmates together may lack these learning opportunities for the young offenders.

Long-Term Positive Effects of the Incarceration

Prisons providing special confinement for young adults use the concept of assisted resistance in their rehabilitative efforts to promote the impetus of their inmates specifically to stop them from further committing offenses (Esperian 316). To achieve this drive, the facilities offer a positive, structured environment for young adults to have positive identities and become resilient in their journey towards leading law-abiding lives. The institutions facilitate talks to the young prisoners by role models who are trusted by various communities and detention centers for motivational support. The courses offered to the young inmates by prisons in special programs help in reducing recidivism in future years. The programs assist them in their personal growth and development.

The knowledge and skills derived from prison education programs help young male prisoners to have higher chances of survival when they are out of confinement since they feel more hopeful and determined to overcome life challenges. The programs also assist the inmates in identifying the reasons that led them to commit crimes and guide them on how to overcome such criminal behavior. Therefore, these programs are paramount in reducing future recidivism among young adults and increasing their chances of a successful re-entry into society upon their discharge from imprisonment (Esperian 328). The building and management of prisons cost huge sums of public money. For this reason, a significant reduction in the number of young adult inmates leads to a remarkable decrease in the overall justice system costs to taxpayers.

Conclusion

In conclusion, in a natural maturing process of young male offenders, effective rehabilitative programs together with a positive, structured environment are some of the essentials of their behavior change. To the young inmates, such provisions act as platforms for turning a leaf and becoming acceptable members of the society.

Works Cited

Esperian, John. The Effect of Prison Education Programs on Recidivism. Journal of Correctional Education, vol. 1, no. 1, 2010, pp. 316-334.

Harvey, Joel. Young Men in Prison. Routledge, 2012.

Kolivoski, Karen, and Jeffrey Shook. Incarcerating Juveniles in Adult Prisons Examining the Relationship between Age and Prison Behavior in Transferred Juveniles. Criminal Justice and Behavior, vol. 43, no. 9, 2016, pp. 1242-1259.

Attitudes among employees in an organization

Attitudes among employees working in an organization refer to emotions that lead to either a negative or positive outlook on ones job and the workplace. Thus, ones attitude about their job is likely to affect their level of job satisfaction. Many factors affect the attitudes of employees in an organization. These are cultural influences, which relate to how ones culture perceives a given job, dispositional influences, which relate to ones personal characteristics and temperament levels, as well as work influences, which are mainly the conditions at the workplace (Saari & Judge, 2004). Bad attitudes among the prison staff may lead to poor performance. The performance can be measured through the accomplishment of their daily duties like enforcing security and equal rights for the prisoners, among others (House of Commons, 2009). However, these aspects may not be implemented owing to poor attitudes, leading to inadequate security and unfair treatment of the prisoners.

Further, the prisons work environment may be affected due to poor employee attitudes. When the staffs in the incarceration facility are rude to each other, hate each other, or discriminate against each other, it is likely that they will not respect each other too. Consequently, the working environment will be characterized by a lot of hostility. However, it is necessary that the employees of a given organization work together for the common good of the organization. Therefore, even though employees are not able to agree with one another or become friends, they should be able to enforce professionalism and a proper code of conduct at the workplace (Saari & Judge, 2004).

Poor attitudes among prison staff may be a sign of more problems such as poor job satisfaction and poor work environment, among others. In effect, this may escalate to high employee turnover. Ideally, every employee likes to work in an atmosphere where they are appreciated and happy. If poor attitudes are prevalent, then it is likely that most of the workers will desire to change jobs or switch careers for better opportunities.

Importance of employee satisfaction within this prison

It is important to ensure that the wardens in this prison are satisfied with their jobs. Notably, when employees are happy with their jobs, the results are compelling for the employers and the employees. In fact, when correctional staff members are satisfied with their jobs, they tend to have more commitment towards their duties, leading to better performance outcomes like better inmate-staff relationships, better prison conditions and standards, as well as secure environments. In one study, when the correctional staff exhibited high levels of job satisfaction, inmates stated that their environment was safe and free from the dangers of sexual assault (Lambert, Barton & Hogan, 1999). Further, when these prison wardens exhibit better job satisfaction, they also show a positive outlook of the incarcerated persons and a strong attitude to foster rehabilitation than punishment.

On the other hand, poor job satisfaction among the prison wardens significantly affects the negative behaviors of the employees. In effect, there is a strong connection between job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Lambert et al., 1999). There are several factors that point to poor employee satisfaction in a prison. The first is the nature of staff relations among the correctional staff. Workers who are satisfied with their work, as well as their work environment, tend to be more collaborative and work in teams. In the case study, it is seen that most of the staff do not get along with each other. In fact, they tend to alienate themselves according to their racial identities.

The third is the level of security in prison. Notably, when there is high safety in prison, the inmates and the wardens tend to get along better, meaning that there is a degree of respect among these persons. In this case, however, the prison has a compromised level of security involving reduced job satisfaction.

Another issue is the degree of absenteeism due to minimal job satisfaction; the wardens are less committed to their jobs and responsibilities. Thus, whenever there is training, most of them do not report to work.

Type of plan to implement to address the problems within the prison

A fundamental issue that is affecting the functions of the prison is job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is lost because the prison workers are no longer motivated in their work. In effect, one of the main plans that I would put in place to ensure that the work is done effectively is to improve the morale of the staff. Among the things that I would do so is to enforce training and education programs in the facility. It is imperative that the correctional staff is trained from time to time as matters involving inmates incarceration are continuously evolving (Hartman, 2003). Resultantly, the officers should undergo continuous training to ensure better protection for the prisoners and themselves. However, the only way to ensure that the employees are considering what they have learned in training is through supervision.

Training will ensure commitment to an ethical code of conduct in the workplace, as well as foster an understanding of the organization and its responsibilities. Also, educational plans will encourage the wardens to undertake further on-the-job education to understand better their functions in the facility (Hartman, 2003). When employees are invited to improve their knowledge on the issues they face in their jobs, they can combat boredom and utilize their free time productively. Further, they can understand diversity issues, as well as develop proactive approaches to problems within their environment. A tuition reimbursement program would be ideal for all employees that would choose to further their education.

Another plan that would work in the facility is the establishment of a mission statement, rules, and procedures. One critical factor that affects the performance of this organization may be the directives in place. For instance, when no mission statement is available, employees lack the necessary information to help them perform their duties (Hartman, 2003). Therefore, one of the things that the prison must do is to derive a mission statement and explain it to the staff to help them understand the direction the facility is operating. Further, it is imperative that the procedures and rules of operation are established within the facility to inform the staff on what to do when to do it, and how to do it. Therefore, every staff will be obligated to behave in line with the rules and regulations of the organization, as well as deliver in line with the stipulated procedures. The ethical criteria for decision-making that best suits this case are the utilitarian approach. This approach to decision-making ensures that the moral decision enforced utilizes a common good for the majority. The reason this approach is the best fit is that the decision-maker can analyze the effects of every decision to both the prison staff and the prisoners and decide on one that ensures the optimal satisfaction of all the parties involved.

Innovative solutions that could be used to address the problems within the prison

Several innovative solutions can be applied to solving the problems in prison. For racial discrimination, innovative approaches can be borrowed from other places that have used the same and succeeded. One such place is the California Department of Correction. The first crucial step would be to evaluate the inmates previous criminal, as well as an incarceration history. This would help to ensure that the inmate does not have any enemies with whom they might end up sharing the same facility or whether there is a need to take care of any other special security needs. Then, the inmates can be divided into about four racial categories of Whites, Blacks, Asians, and others.

Also, it is important to divide them into smaller groupings like the Hispanics who come from Southern and Northern California. Then, the prisoners should be put separately to avoid perpetual conflict. Normally, the entire prison would have to be entirely integrated, with the exception of the reception cells only. This variation in treatment is justifiable as the reception cell is usually unique and confines inmates for a greater part of the day. This makes it even more cumbersome for the prison staff to take control of the occurrences of the cell. While race is not commonly used as a factor towards determining which inmate will be assigned a single cell, those who are assigned to a double cell could be given the option to decide who they will share the room with. This will help to reduce cases of violence between cellmates, thereby giving them a conducive environment to be compatible. Inmates that are often assigned to dormitories are usually nonviolent and make it easier to have people of different races share the same dorm.

Technology can also be used in curbing violence in prison. For instance, the use of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) is a great idea that can be employed to keep track of the inmates and their whereabouts within the prison setup. Besides, a real-time location system known as the TSI Prism from the Black Creek Integrated Systems was designed specifically for correctional facilities like prisons. This technology can be used to identify or track the inmates location at any given time. In a case of violence, the staff/warden can be able to locate inmates that are known to be overly violent at any given time.

Recreational facilities such as modern gym equipment for keeping fit, television, and gaming machines can help reduce excesses within the prison.

Such activities can keep the prisoners occupied during free time and help them diffuse stress and anxiety, which cause them to look for relief avenues resulting that result in violence.

Performance and social arrangement norms in a prison

Social arrangement norms refer to loyalty formed on the basis of the informal groups that one is associated with, which in turn affects their social interactions with people in the group or outside the group. These are mainly the people that one associates with during lunch breaks, that one goes out with from the work environment, ones friends at the workplace, and much more. Therefore, norms that are formed in such circles may affect ones job satisfaction because it is through such relationships that social information processing takes place. Therefore, most employees tend to look at their coworkers as a source of information for developing attitudes concerning their work environment. Thus, job satisfaction or dissatisfaction is likely to arise depending on the feedback they attain from their coworkers. In effect, new people hired into the organization may have their attitudes tainted during such interactions. Thus, social information derived through social arrangement norms can affect the attitudes and behaviors of the employees.

On the other hand, conformity refers to an individuals ability to change their behavior and attitudes to conform to a groups norms. Specifically, conformity relates to change in the behavior of people owing to unspoken group pressures, meaning that people try to fit in the group. The effect of social arrangement norms on employees who are not conforming personality-wise is alienation. Ideally, social pressures present in such social groups force one to be consistent with the rules and standards of the group. To the individuals who fail to conform in this case, it is likely that they will earn the title of betrayers or people who are trying to please the authorities. Thus, it is likely that these employees will gain the hatred of the rest, be alienated from the larger group, and face discrimination in the workplace, among other negative issues.

References

Hartman, A. L. (2003). An examination of employee morale in correctional institutions. International Foundation for Protection Officers. Web.

House of Commons (2009). Role of the prison officer. Web.

Lambert, E. G., Barton, S. M., & Hogan, N. L. (1999). The missing link between job satisfaction and correctional staff behavior: The issue of organizational commitment. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 24(1), 95-116.

Saari, L. M., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Employee attitudes and job satisfaction. Human Resource Management, 43(4), 395-407.