The article being reviewed concerns criminal justice and behavior where an intensive rehabilitation supervisory program is analyzed by the application of a quasi-experimental evaluation. There has been an increased understanding that was developed in regard to the interventions that do work as well as those that do not work with offenders. Programs dealing with treatment to offender risk, responsivity factors and needs have been linked with reduced recidivism (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta and Rooney). In other words, it analyses a cognitive-behavioral treatment plan delivered within the scope of intensive community administration through electronic monitoring (EM).
There exists recognition that sanctions devoid of a rehabilitative element are inefficient in minimizing recidivism. Offenders getting treatment while in an electronic monitoring program were statistically matched on needs factors and risk to inmates who were denied treatment services (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta and Rooney). The outcome revealed that treatment proved to be efficient in minimizing recidivism for higher risk offenders, substantiating the risk principle of offender treatment. The significance of harmonizing treatment intensity to offender risk level as well as ensuring that the treatment element in intensive supervision programs is proved and reaffirmed (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta and Rooney).
The administration of offender risk holds to be one of the most crucial functions surrounding the criminal justice system. The emphasis with extensive resources are being expended by the corrections, courts and police in an effort to decrease the risk that some offenders may pose to the community as well as protecting the public. Nevertheless, methods used to ensure public safety and control offender risk vary considerably (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta and Rooney). They vary from severe controls of each person`s freedom with minimum attention to offender needs such as incapacitation to offender rehabilitation programs. Similar to the variety of choice of risk management options, the same way the efficiency of existing different kinds of interventions tailored to reducing recidivism. The preferred balancing of rehabilitation and sanctions often solely depends on the debates on criminal justice policy (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta and Rooney).
A vigorous debate was sparked in establishing the merits of offender rehabilitation. A review was made on 231 studies of interventions that were meant to reduce recidivism. The study was qualitative as a sample was taken from different studies that were to instill a sure way of reducing recidivism with the aid of rehabilitation. The outcome was that deterrence provided a reasonable alternative. However, the judicious application of sanctions provided a sure way that justice was practiced. Simultaneously, a knowledge base was set up outlining a number of crucial characteristics pertaining to efficient treatment. A type of client X Treatment interactions proved the means of efficient intervention. Furthermore, cognitive-behavioral interventions were majorly linked with reduced recidivism (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta and Rooney).
The outcome of meta-analyses demonstrated that treatment was connected with reductions in recidivism. In addition, despite the fact that some of the treatment did not working properly, there existed an increased understanding as to alternatives that constituted efficient treatment. Efficient treatment comprised of programs that followed a number of principles. They included the responsivity principles, need, and risk. The risk principle purports that the intensity of treatment must be matched to the offender’s risk level (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta and Rooney). For instance, low-risk offenders need fewer services while higher risk offenders need intensive levels of services. The need principle demonstrates a distinction between noncriminogenic and criminogenic needs. Offenders comprise of several dissimilar needs. However, not all needs are correlated to their criminal behavior. Lastly, the responsivity principle outlines the significance of corresponding to the treatment modality to the personality and cognitive characteristics of the offender (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta and Rooney).
The validity of the treatment principles was reviewed on 80 studies regarding offender rehabilitation as well yielded an estimate of 154-effect size. The phi coefficient regarded an evaluate of the association for 2 X 2 contingency tables as well interpretable along the Pearson’s r lines, was applied as a measure of effect size (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta and Rooney). The meta-analysis included 294 tests pertaining correctional interventions. The Pearson’s r was taken to be .25. In addition, an effect size in line with the magnitude was clinically relevant. Using the binomial effect size, an r of .25 signifies a variation of about 24% between the untreated and treated groups. Moreover, the effect mass varied with the figure of treatment principles apparent in the programs (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta and Rooney).
The results proved to be substantially vital as it tried to address several issues that have been disturbing among the scholars. In spite of the substantive body of evidence expressively revealing that, offender treatment is effectual in reducing recidivism, the approach of get-tough dominates the criminal and political justice policy landscapes (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta and Rooney). It is evident that legislators are rather prepared to implement harsher penalties for a wider selection of offenders despite that it may not obligatory reflect what the public wants. Moreover, juveniles are no longer restrained from adult responsibilities as well as severe sanctions. Nonetheless, within the harsh political framework, treatment programs tend to be imposed to offenders. The ever emerging to be common is the facilitation of treatment services within the context of sanctions. Appraisal of popular get-tough programs for instance intensive probation services as well as boot camps find reductions in recidivism only in the event when offender treatment is a considerable element of the program (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta and Rooney).
Works Cited
Bonta, James, Suzanne Wallace-Capretta & Jennifer Rooney. A quasi experimental evaluation of an intensive rehabilitation supervision program. Criminal Justice and Behavior (2000): 312-329.
