Abstract
The issue of how criminals are sentenced and treated is a problem within in the United States and around the world. The sentence given for a crime that is committed is not always equal from one state or region to another. Diversion programs are therefore a method that have been created to offer a second chance to first-time offenders and youthful offenders that are deemed worthy of a second chance. These programs are designed to be supervised and carried out by certified and experienced professionals at the behest of the court, and are meant to curb any and all criminal tendencies in those who would otherwise become another financial burden upon taxpayers. The criteria for such individuals entering the program is simple enough, they cannot be convicted of violent crimes and must be facing misdemeanor or minor charges that could otherwise mar their public record and cause them difficulty in remaining a productive member of society.
Introduction
Typical diversion programs are a form of rehabilitation that are designed to prevent flooding the prison system with inmates that experience a high rate of recidivism due to infractions that are considered minor enough to be problematic but not life-altering. These programs are meant to remedy any behaviors that might lead to the sentencing and incarceration of those who are still able to change, but are not entirely effective upon career criminals. The average recidivism rate of career criminals is often too much for such a program to handle. Diversion programs work best when applied to low-level or first-time offenders.
Many times low-level offenses will be subject to differing punishments based on the laws of the state. This means that something such as shoplifting can be a fairly easy charge in one state but will incur a heavier penalty in another. As Sarah J. Berman (2016) would explain, diversion programs could possibly do a great deal of good, saving valuable jail and prison space by rehabilitating an offender rather than locking them up. This would save not only space, but taxpayer money as well.
Statistics
The care that is needed to house, feed, and maintain the general well-being of each
inmate comes with a very large price tag. As noted by the Center for Health & Justice at TASC
(2013), the rising costs of inmate maintenance have become a concern. As of 2010 the average
requires extra care numbers roughly 1.4 thousand, but the expenditures for those inmates has
reached as high as $1.5 billion dollars. If the numbers are to be believed this means that millions
of dollars are being spent to house inmates that might have benefited from a lesser charge and a
chance at a rehabilitation program. This could cut costs and save the taxpayers a great deal of money.
There is a vast difference between repeat offenders and first-time offenders, as well as offenders that participate in lesser crimes. Diversion programs are best utilized with those who are not bound to use the program as a dodge to escape another period of incarceration due to one crime or another. Rehabilitation is seen to be more efficient for those that are first-time offenders. However, according to Bridget Chapman (2016), the new and updated diversion programs are designed to offer those who desire a change in their lives a chance to turn their lives around for the better. The only roadblock that stands in the way of this practice is the very real issue that is brought up by the Center for Health & Justice at TSC (2013), which is the fact that roughly 50 percent of inmates in prison are commonly diagnosed with substance abuse issues or some form of mental instability. This number increases to well over 60 percent in local jails.
What this means is that the funding for such a program would need to almost double what
is already being spent to take care of these inmates at state and county facilities. This initial cost
would be staggering, not to mention that it would require a large number of trained and certified
personnel that do not exist in many states. It would also be less available to those who commit
serious offenses as they are often removed from any consideration when it comes to
rehabilitation. While this is a highly exclusory practice, the Australian Institute of Health and
Welfare (2013) has shown that by marginalizing individuals the problem of overcrowding only
becomes compounded.
they are marginalized in such a way that rehabilitation quickly becomes a non-factor. In
America, and throughout other countries, the driving force behind rehabilitation and who it can be used to affect usually comes down to the cost of the program and how efficient it is to reach out to every single individual. Risk assessment becomes a factor in who receives access to the program and who does not. While this practice seems suspect, it is in a sense a form of legal triage that seeks to determine who will benefit the most from a diversion program.
Those offenders that are repeat and career criminals do not often receive further rehabilitation often because they do meet the defining characteristics that these programs are designed to identify. Also, diversionary programs are typically for first-time offenders as well as juvenile offenders as, according to Solicitor General (1997), there is a rarity of demand for diversion programs concerning adults. This is largely because after a certain age rehabilitation is seen to be less effective. Adults who engage in criminal activities are not always repeat criminals, but barring any mental illness or other defect, adults are often treated differently in accordance with the idea that they are well aware of the law and their responsibility to follow the rules.
Serious criminal offenses are not typically offered the benefit of a diversion program
largely because they are often violent and harmful crimes that are considerably worse than
misdemeanors and lesser felonies. As it has been stated by attorney Christopher Cosley, these
programs are to keep those first-time and nonviolent offenders from developing a criminal record
that could possibly stain their future and create little more than hardship. Felons and ex-felons
are often seen as undesirable even after having served their time and are not afforded nearly as
many rights as the average citizen. Before the advent of diversionary programs this stigma
became quite common. Without a chance to turn their lives around, youthful offenders and first-
time offenders are far more likely to become repeat offenders.
Conclusion
There are many reasons why America’s legal system is in turmoil in the current day and
age, but one very noticeable problem is that offenders of all types are being sentenced by the same system that crowds jails and prisons without any distinction between one crime and another. One crime is not like another in its severity despite the shared fact that laws are being broken and order of some sort must be imposed. One major difference between first-time offenses and well-established criminal careers is that for the first-timers there is still a chance to continue a well-ordered and law-abiding existence. By sentencing every last offender, minor or serious, by the same measure, the cost to the taxpayer and the loss to the individual becomes insurmountable. Diversion programs are expertly designed and carried out by professionals that are charged with offering minor offenders the chance to change and become productive members of society.
What has been discovered worldwide is that by sentencing all offenders in equal measure regardless of the severity of the crime is not a suitable method of punishment. Sending those convicted of minor charges to jail or prison where they will be housed with violent offenders is a serious matter that invites both the risk of recidivism as well as the increasingly high costs of caring for those individuals that should not be incarcerated in the first place. Diversion programs are set in place to insure that first-time and/or nonviolent offenders are given the chance for redemption in the form of rehabilitation to reduce recidivism as well as lead to the reduction in prison overcrowding. Diversion programs are meant to offer a chance for those facing criminal charges to be treated according to the severity of the crime. Instead of treating every offender as the same type of threat, diversion programs will manage to rehabilitate individuals and allow them to avoid making the same mistakes.
Works Cited
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. “Closing the Gap.” Australian Institute of Family
Studies, http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129545614
Accessed 4 Jan. 2017.
Berman, Sarah J. “Diversion Programs.” NOLO,
http://www.nolo.com/legalencyclopedia/diversion-programs.html, Accessed 4 Jan. 2017.
Center for Health & Justice at TSC. “No Entry: A National Survey of Criminal Justice Diversion
Programs and Initiatives.” Open Society Foundations,
http://www2.centerforhealthandjustice.org/sites/www2.centerforhealthandjustice.org/files/publications/CHJ%20Diversion%20Report_web.pdf, Accessed 4 Jan. 2017.
Chapman, Bridget. “ Community Diversion Program aims to help low-level criminals in 2016.”
Kimatv.com, http://kimatv.com/news/local/community-diversion-program-aims-to-help-low-level-criminals-in-2016, Accessed 4 Jan. 2017.
Cosley, Christopher M. “Understanding Diversion Programs.” Law Offices of Christopher M.
Cosley, http://www.cosleycriminaldefense.com/criminal-blog/2016/07/05/understanding-diversion-programs/, Accessed 5 Jan. 2017.
Solicitor General. “Diversion Programs for Adults.” Justice and Reconciliation,
http://restorativejustice.org/rj-library/diversion-programs-for-adults/91/
Accessed 5 Jan. 2017.
