Correctional officers in charge of halfway houses require the support of the community to succeed in their duties. However, they face a plethora of challenges in a community based setting. This paper will briefly discuss these challenges and their solutions. The nexus between the community and institutional care is extremely significant and can only be harnessed if halfway house programs are given the priority they deserve. This is because they not only offer residential, but also rehabilitative services to offenders that are in need. In other words, they provide critical solutions for the reformation of offenders and solving community problems and challenges which hinder development. Some of the reasons for resistance are discussed herein.
A community is more receptive to the idea of rehabilitation and reformation of offenders if it takes place within the community rather than in the prisons. Unfortunately, some communities resist any attempts to establish halfway houses within its environs. This is because they believe that it is an attempt to suppress their rights. In most cases, this happens if the government implements such programs without consulting the community. They, therefore, adopt the mistaken belief that the government prioritized the rights and freedoms of the offenders at the expense of the rights and liberties of the community.
Misconceptions about a community’s perspective, attitude or opinions concerning the incarceration of offenders can also lead to resistance. Some of the policy planners have a fixed mindset that communities are against rehabilitative measures and policies. On the contrary, most communities would rather integrate the offender rather than see the offender severely punished.
The security measures implemented in a halfway house and the degree of awareness of the same within the community contributes immensely to the level of resistance. If the community is not accurately informed of the security measures placed in a halfway house, the latter will naturally resist any attempt to establish a warehouse within its environs. Additionally, the relationship established between government officials involved in the setting up of the halfway houses and the community is critical to how receptive a community will be to the idea of halfway houses. Strained relations will increase the likelihood of resistance because there is no trust between them.
However, despite these challenges, there are a number of solutions, which if implemented, can be instrumental in reducing the likelihood of any form of resistance. One of the cardinal ways to avoid resistance entails requesting the community members to volunteer their services in the rehabilitative process of the offenders. The involvement of the community will serve to assure them that there are no risks in the process which could seriously harm the community. It is also critical to ensure that members of the community understand correctional services as this serves to improve public safety.
Correctional officers and parole officers should conduct themselves in an ethical, professional and competent manner in order to gain the confidence of the community. This will help the community trust them to carry out their duties and obligations in tandem with the rule of law and with the interest of the community at heart. More fundamentally, the halfway houses should have management boards, which are inclusive of community elders and leaders who will have an advisory role towards the management of the correctional facilities.
References
Del Carmen, R. V. (2012). Criminal Procedure: Law and Practice, 9th ed. Dallas: Cengage Learning.
Pollock, J. M. (2012). Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice. New York: Cengage Learning.
Vito, G., & Maahs, J. (2011). Criminology: Theory, Research, and Policy. New York: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
