Select Page
  

What questions emerge regarding the practice of contracting with private, for-profit organizations to operate correctional facilities? Should the job of operating prisons be the sole responsibility of the government?Which characteristics of the prison population might present major problems for the managers of institutions?Post in depth (3-4 paragraph) APA cited posts with in text/reference list (Quality is key)(APPLY THE BOOK AND AT LEAST ONE OUTSIDE SCHOLARLY SOURCE, CITING (IN TEXT AND REFERENCE LIST) AND PARAPHRASES AS WELL AS THE RESEARCH)Chapter 10 from the book is the uploaded filePlease make sure that what you write uses the critical thinkingprocess. Make sure what is written doesn’t just address peripheral issues butuses analysis and creative thought. Don’t just recite facts/textual informationbut be sure to also address the issues being questioned with analysis and creative thought. Make sure what iswritten is articulate/understandable and free from errors in grammar,punctuation and/or usage.
ac_10.docx

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
which characteristics might be problems?
Just from $10/Page
Order Essay

Chapter 10
Clear, Todd R.; Reisig, Michael D.; Cole, George F.. American Corrections. Cengage
Learning. Kindle Edition.
ON DECEMBER 11, 2013, convicted murder John McCluskey was spared the death
penalty when the jury failed to reach a unanimous verdict on his punishment.
McCluskey was on trial for events surrounding his 2010 escape from the Arizona
State Penitentiary, where he had been serving a 15-year sentence for attempted
murder. He and two other inmates escaped using wire cutters to break through a
fence. Assisted by his fiancée, Casslyn Welch, McCluskey and his accomplices made
their getaway before eventually splitting up.1 The escape received considerable
media attention, and many questions about the case arose. Why were such
dangerous men incarcerated in a medium-security facility? How did they get their
hands on a pair of wire cutters? Why didn’t the prison alarm sound when the
perimeter was breached? Did the fact that the prison was operated by a private
corporation contribute in any way to the escape? For example, were security
precautions overlooked to increase profit margins? These are legitimate questions.
The public entrusts prison officials to protect them from convicted offenders, many
of whom have committed violent crimes. This is no small undertaking. At the end of
2012, more than 1.57 million men and women were incarcerated in state and
federal correctional facilities.2 McCluskey and Welch were apprehended on August
19, 2010, while camping in the Apache–Sitgreaves National Forest in eastern
Arizona. Prior to their arrest, McCluskey and Welch, along with one of the other
escapees, carjacked and murdered an elderly couple in New Mexico who had pulled
off Interstate 40 to sleep at a rest stop while traveling west on a camping trip.3 A
report issued by the state found that the private facility where the escape took place
failed miserably. According to the report, false alarms were frequent at the prison
and regularly ignored by staff. On the day of the escape, for example, the alarm had
been triggered 89 times. The report also noted that staff turnover was a problem at
the facility.4 This case brings up important questions regarding the organization of
correctional institutions in the United States, including these: What role does the
federal government play in prison operations? How do states operate prisons? How
are prisons designed? Where are prisons located? How does prison privatization
work? What are the characteristics of inmates in the nation’s prisons? This chapter
explores these questions by focusing primarily on the incarceration of male adults,
who make up about 93 percent of the prison population.
Links to the Past Reformers are frustrated by the sheer durability of prisons. For
example, the oldest prison in America—New Jersey’s State Prison in Trenton, which
opened in 1798 and was rebuilt in 1836—still houses offenders. Structures of stone
and concrete are not easily redesigned when correctional goals change. Elements of
major reform movements can still be found within the walls of many older prisons.
In line with the Quakers’ belief that offenders could be redeemed only if removed
from the distractions of the city, many correctional facilities still operate in rural
areas—Stateville (Illinois), Attica (New York), and Walla Walla (Washington)—far
from most of the inmates’ families, friends, and communities. Although many
modern prisons feature “campus” settings, the stronghold remains the primary
architectural style. Life on the “inside” varies with the type and locale of the
institution and the characteristics of the inmates. Yet a prison is still a prison,
whatever it is called and however it is constructed (see “Realization”). The image of
the “big house,” popularized in countless movies and television shows, is still
imprinted on the minds of most Americans, although it has long ceased to be a
realistic portrayal—if indeed it ever was. Moreover, much social science literature
about prison society is based on studies conducted in big houses, or maximumsecurity prisons, during the 1950s. Fictional depictions of prison life are typically set
in the big-house fortress, where the inmates are tough and the guards are just as
tough or tougher. But U.S. correctional institutions have always been more varied
than movies portray them. Although big houses were very common in much of the
country during the first half of the twentieth century, many prisons, especially in the
South, did not conform to this model. Racial segregation was maintained, prisoners
were used as farm labor, and the massive walled structures were not as common as
in the North. The typical big house of the 1940s and 1950s was a walled prison with
large, tiered cell blocks, a yard, shops, and industries. The prisoners, in an average
population of about 2,500 per institution, came from both urban and rural areas,
were usually poor, and, outside the South, were predominantly white. The prison
society was essentially isolated; access to visitors, mail, and other communication
was restricted. Prisoners’ days were very structured, and guards enforced the rules.
There was a basic division between inmates and staff; rank was observed and
discipline maintained. In the big house, few treatment programs existed; custody
was the primary goal. During the 1960s and early 1970s, when the rehabilitation
model was dominant, many states built new prisons and converted others into
“correctional institutions.” Treatment programs administered by counselors and
teachers became a major part of prison life, although the institutions continued to
give priority to the custody goals of security, discipline, and order. The civil rights
movement of the early 1960s profoundly affected prisoners, especially minority
inmates. Prisoners demanded their constitutional rights as citizens and greater
sensitivity to their needs. As discussed in Chapter 5, the courts began to take notice
of the legal rights of prisoners. As inmates gained more legal services, the
traditional judicial hands-off policy evaporated. Suddenly, administrators had to
respond to the directives of the judiciary and run the institutions according to
constitutional mandates. During the past 40 years, as the population of the United
States has changed, so has the prison population. The number of African American
and Hispanic inmates has greatly increased. More inmates come from urban areas,
and more have been convicted of drug-related and violent offenses. Incarcerated
members of street gangs, which are often organized along racial lines, frequently
regroup inside prison and contribute to elevated levels of violence. Another major
change has been the number of correctional officers who are members of public
employee unions, along with their use of collective bargaining to improve working
conditions, safety procedures, and training. Further, the focus of corrections has
shifted to crime control, which emphasizes the importance of incarceration. As a
result, the number of people in prison has increased. Some politicians argue that
offenders have it too “cushy” and that prisons should return to the strict regimes
found in the early twentieth century. Many states have removed educational and
recreational amenities from their institutions. The number of people in America’s
prisons has increased substantially over the past decade. Tensions have built within
the overcrowded institutions. Although today’s correctional administrators seek to
provide humane incarceration, they must struggle with limited resources. The
modern prison faces many of the difficult problems that confront other parts of the
criminal justice system: racial conflicts, legal issues, limited resources, and growing
populations. Despite these challenges, can prisons still achieve their objectives? The
answer to this question depends, in part, on how we define the goals of
incarceration. The Goals of Incarceration Citing the nature of the inmates and the
need to protect the staff and the community, most people consider security the
dominant purpose of a prison. High walls, razor wire, searches, checkpoints, and
regular counts of inmates serve the security function: Few inmates escape. More
important, such features set the tone for the daily operations. Prisons are expected
to be impersonal, quasi-military organizations where strict discipline, minimal
amenities, and restrictions on freedom carry out the punishment of criminals. Three
models of incarceration have predominated since the early 1940s: custodial,
rehabilitation, and reintegration. Each reflects one style of institutional
organization. 1. The custodial model assumes that prisoners have been incarcerated
for the purpose of incapacitation, deterrence, or retribution. It emphasizes security,
discipline, and order, which subordinate the prisoner to the authority of the warden.
Discipline is strict, and most aspects of behavior are regulated. This model prevailed
in corrections before World War II, and it continues to dominate most maximumsecurity institutions. 2. The rehabilitation model, developed during the 1950s,
emphasizes treatment programs designed to reform the offender. According to this
model, security and housekeeping activities are preconditions for rehabilitative
efforts. As all aspects of the organization should be directed toward rehabilitation,
professional treatment specialists enjoy a higher status than do other employees.
Treatment programs exist in most contemporary institutions. But since the
rethinking of the rehabilitation goal in the 1970s, very few prisons continue to
conform to this model. 3. The reintegration model is linked to the structures and
goals of community corrections. Recognizing that prisoners will be returning to
society, this model emphasizes maintaining offenders’ ties to family and community
as a method of reform. Prisons following this model gradually give inmates greater
freedom and responsibility during their confinement, moving them to halfway
houses or work release programs before releasing them under some form of
community supervision. Although one can find correctional institutions that
conform to each of these models, most prisons are mainly custodial. Nevertheless,
treatment programs do exist, and even some of the most custodial institutions
attempt to prepare inmates for reentry into free society. Because prisons are
expected to pursue many different and often incompatible goals, it would seem that
they are almost doomed to fail. Many people believe that the mission of prisons is
confinement and that the basic purpose of imprisonment is to punish offenders
fairly, without undue suffering, through terms of confinement proportionate to the
seriousness of the crimes.6 If the purpose of prisons is punishment through
confinement under fair and just conditions, what are the implications for
correctional managers? (See “For Critical Thinking.”) Following these criteria, what
measures should we use to evaluate prisons? Organization for Incarceration All 50
states and the federal government operate prisons. Offenders are held in 1,292
confinement facilities, nearly 92 percent of which are operated by the states, and the
remainder by the federal government and private companies. The largest
percentage of state confinement facilities are located in the South (47 percent), with
20 percent located in the Midwest, 18.5 percent in the West, and 14.5 percent in the
Northeast.7 For the most part, prisons, as distinguished from jails, house convicted
felons and those misdemeanants who have been sentenced to terms of more than
one year. However, note that various state governments and the federal government
differ in terms of bureaucratic organization for incarceration, number and types of
institutions, staffing, and size of offender populations. We now look at the federal
and state systems in turn. The Federal Bureau of Prisons In 1930 Congress created
the Federal Bureau of Prisons within the Department of Justice. The bureau was
responsible for “the safekeeping, care, protection, instruction, and discipline of all
persons charged or convicted of offenses against the United States.” At year-end
1930, shortly after the bureau was created, there were 14 federal prisons housing
about 13,000 inmates. Today the bureau is highly centralized, with a director
(appointed by the president), six regional directors, and a staff of nearly 39,000
who supervise more than 215,000 inmates. To carry out its tasks, the bureau has a
network of more than 100 institutions.8 The jurisdiction of federal criminal law,
unlike that of the states, is restricted to crimes involving interstate commerce,
certain serious felonies, violations of other federal laws, and crimes committed on
federal property. Historically, federal prisons have housed bank robbers,
extortionists, people who commit mail fraud, and arsonists. Between 1940 and 1980
the federal prison population remained fairly stable, hovering around 24,000
inmates. The explosion of the federal prison population in the 1980s to almost
58,000 inmates was caused by the initiation of the war on drugs and the Sentencing
Reform Act of 1984. The number of drug offenders in federal prisons has steadily
increased. Drug offenders currently constitute over one-half of the federal inmate
population. The Sentencing Reform Act established determinate sentencing,
reduced good time, and abolished parole, which substantially increased the average
length of imprisonment. There are fewer violent offenders in federal prisons than in
most state institutions. Federal prisoners are often a more sophisticated type of
criminal, from a higher socioeconomic class, than the typical state prisoner.
Interestingly, nearly 55,000—about 26 percent—of federal inmates are citizens of
other countries.9 Although the International Prisoner Transfer Program permits the
United States to transfer some foreign national prisoners to their home countries,
few foreign inmates are actually transferred each year. For example, less than 1
percent of the 40,651 federal prisoners from treaty countries were transferred in
2010. A recent evaluation of the program found that the low percentage of inmates
using the program is partially a result of the Bureau of Prisons’ failure to inform all
foreign inmates of the program and the reluctance of many countries to take back all
of their citizens incarcerated in federal prisons.10 Figure 10.1 presents some key
characteristics of federal prisoners. The federal government does not have enough
pretrial detention space to house most people accused of violating the federal
criminal law, so a majority of pretrial detainees are housed in state or local facilities
on a contractual basis. The U.S. Marshals Service is responsible for placing these
prisoners. Although all 50 states have laws requiring their correctional facilities to
accept federal pretrial detainees, the marshals typically enter into
intergovernmental service agreements with receptive jails. Local officials fear that
sophisticated federal prisoners will bring lawsuits challenging the conditions of
their confinement and believe that federal officials expect the higher federal
standards to be maintained at local expense. The Bureau of Prisons currently
operates 116 institutions that are classified using five security levels, ranging from
“minimum” to “high” security. The bureau has one “supermax” prison, located in
Florence, Colorado, that houses inmates deemed to be the most dangerous. The
bureau is organized so that the wardens report to one of the regional offices.
Regional office staff deal with a variety of matters, including health and
psychological services, financial management, inmate discipline, and food service.
Technical assistance is also provided to institutional and community corrections
personnel by regional office staff. The bureau provides many self-improvement
programs to inmates, including vocational training, education, anger management,
and life skills training. The Federal Prison Industries (FPI) is a correctional program
that employs inmates in FPI factories. The objective is to teach inmates job skills.
Inmates receive pay for their work and can even earn bonuses if their performance
merits it. Prisoners who are not part of FPI are still required to work, unless they are
deemed a security threat or have a medical condition that prevents them. They work
at institutional jobs such as groundskeeping and food service.
State Prison Systems Although states vary considerably in how they organize
corrections, the executive branch of each state government administers its prisons.
This point is important because probation is often part of the judiciary, parole may
be separate from corrections, and in most states jails are run by county
governments. Commissioners of corrections, normally appointed by state
governors, are responsible for the operation of prisons. As discussed in Chapter 13,
each institution is administered by a warden (often called a superintendent), who
reports directly to the commissioner or a deputy commissioner for institutions. The
number of employees in state correctional agencies has risen dramatically during
the past decade: Upwards of 390,000 people—administrators, officers, and program
specialists—work in state institutions.12 To a great extent, the total capacity of a
state’s prisons reflects the size of the state’s population. As discussed in Chapter 18,
however, the number of offenders in a state’s institutions reflects more than just
crime rates and social factors. Sentencing practices, legislative appropriations for
corrections, and politics can also affect incarceration rates. In addition to
organization, states vary considerably in the number, size, type, and location of
correctional facilities. For example, Louisiana’s state penitentiary at Angola has
more than 5,000 inmates, whereas institutions for inmates with special problems
frequently house fewer than 100. Some states (such as New Hampshire) have
centralized incarceration in a few institutions, and other states, such as California,
New York, and Texas, have a wide mix of sizes and styles—secure institutions,
diagnostic units, work camps, forestry centers, and pre-release centers. For
example, New Jersey has 13 institutions, including 2 youth facilities, a women’s
prison, and a reception and assignment facility (see Figure 10.2).13 The Design and
Classification of Prisons Since the era of John Howard in England and the Quakers in
Philadelphia, penologists have pondered the optimal design of prisons. In all eras,
attempts were made to design correctional institutions that would advance the
prevailing purpose of the criminal sanction. In this section we discuss some of the
changes and concepts in prison design. A cardinal principle of architecture is that
form follows function: The design of a structure should serve the structure’s
purpose. During the early 1800s some English and American architects specialized
in designing penitentiaries that would accommodate contemplation, industry, and
isolation, thought to be the necessary conditions for moral reform. Efforts during
the penitentiary era were directed at building institutions that would promote
penance. When prison industry became the focus after the Civil War, a different
design was proposed to enhance the efficiency of the workshops. When
punishment through custody reigned supreme, the emphasis was on the fortresslike edifice that ensured security. And during the rehabilitation era of the 1950s and
1960s, new prisons were built in styles thought to promote treatment. The design
and operational characteristics of today’s prisons vary considerably from state to
state. Some states and the federal government have created smaller facilities. But
even with the prison-building boom of the 1990s, many ins …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Order your essay today and save 10% with the discount code ESSAYHSELP