solved Response to AAron: The text states that rehabilitation is the

Response to AAron:
The text states that rehabilitation is the planned correctional intervention that targets to change the internal and social criminogenic factors with the goal of reducing recidivism and where, possible, of improving other aspects of an offender’s life (Cullen & Jonson, 2017). The text goes on to state that there are five components to this definition. The intervention is undertaken by the correctional system. This means that any intervention or rehabilitation efforts are taken over by the correctional system and likely in a secure facility. Although it is important to clarify that secure correctional facilities may not be the best environment to undergo rehabilitation and treatment The intervention is also planned, meaning that it is designed to have specific features and will be administered by knowledgeable and experienced personnel who specialize in this particular field of study. This is because many correctional workers do not have the expertise or the resources to successfully fulfill intervention efforts. Intervention is meant to target for change the factors that are causing the offender’ criminality. In other words all the factors such as antisocial attitudes and features as well as antisocial relationships are analyzed and targeted as well. The interventions main goal is to reduce recidivism. By knowing what works in rehabilitation, recidivism can be decreased a significant amount among offenders. Reducing recidivism is also critical in protecting the public. Lastly, intervention may also help improve the lives of offenders by addressing some of the issues that caused them to be criminal in the first place such as behavioral and psychological issues (Cullen & Jonson, 2017). Important to note that some issues that offenders have that increase recidivism are not addressed until they enter the criminal justice system such as mental health issues (Cox et al, 2018). Rehabilitation is utilitarian with the purpose of reforming the offender. Its key correctional policies are treatment programs, probation and parole as well as the juvenile justice system. Rehabilitation is an important correctional theory because if society simply adheres to the incapacitation theory of crime without rehabilitation and treatment efforts, those offenders simply reenter society no better than when they went in. Rehabilitation has a number of challenges to overcome, namely cost and personnel as well as the desire from society to adhere more retribution and incapacitation efforts rather than rehabilitation. Part of the issue is knowing what works and what does not work. Firstly, evidence regarding research programs needs to be evaluated. There are four essential steps in reviewing the evidence. Firstly you must conduct all the evidence you can from studies, both published and unpublished. Failure to do so may bias your results and won’t encompass all the crucial information. Secondly, you would decide which of the studies should be included in your review. You would like to include program evaluation. Different types of experiments will yield different results that will give you a well-rounded view of the information you’ve chosen to study. Failing to fully research the experiments can lead to misleading information due to flawed experiments. Thirdly, how will you convey your information after it is compiled? Meta-analysis or narrative reviews are effective ways to show what you have found. The method in which you use is important because it can also change the overall conclusion. Lastly you must conclude your review and interpret what the studies mean (Cullen & Jonson, 2017). The text goes on to state that across numerous studies that one type if intervention is the most reliable in achieving high reductions in recidivism. That intervention program is cognitive behavioral programs. They focus on doing two things: they try to cognitively restructure the distorted thinking of an individual which are sometimes called “thinking errors”, they try to assist the person to learn new adaptive cognitive skills. These programs attempt to define the problems that led to conflict with law enforcement as well as criminal behavior. The program then sets goals and attempts to generate prosocial solutions and then implement new solutions (Cullen & Jonson, 2017). The text goes on to state that a cognitive behavioral program within corrections would follow a series of steps. The predominant antisocial beliefs of the offender in question are identified. The offender is then told that their beliefs are not socially acceptable. The offender is exposed to alternative prosocial ways of thinking and behaving. Courses in therapy or anger management are also encouraged. Eventually the offender’s behavior is shaped into an appropriate level. Just as there are more effective programs to reduce recidivism, there are also programs that would likely never work. Punishment-oriented programs that emphasize punishment and deterrence have been shown to have little effect on offenders. While these programs may have some value to conservatives who enjoy the retributive nature of these programs, they ultimately serve nor purpose just as retribution does. Character building programs are a subcategory of punitive approaches that try to break the offender’s identity down and rebuild them into something more socially acceptable. While the text does not clarify the actual meaning of this practice, it can be implied that it relates to a subject’s emotional identity and personality. Boosting of self-esteem can actually create more confident offenders and non-directive counseling can create an arena for manipulative offenders as they set the tone and agenda (Cullen & Jonson, 2017). Rehabilitation and treatment are not as common because they require a significant effort on the part of personnel to truly be effective. One thing in common between retribution and incapacitation is that it is “easy”. It is easy to punish criminals when society believes they deserve it and easy to simply place them in warehouse prisons away from society. The “away syndrome” does not simply exist in juvenile justice, but also in corrections in general (Cox et al, 2018). When society does not have to think about criminals, they care little about what happens to them including being rehabilitated. Another issue is that simply because a specialist or therapist believes someone to be rehabilitated does not mean society will accept them as so. What if the stigma of being a criminal, even a former offender, never leaves? Could the labeling theory or rather relabeling occur? Barriers that keep it from being more widely used is simply not knowing what works and what does work may be costly. Society can easily get behind incapacitation or retribution because it stimulates the away syndrome and the primal need for vengeance. Society is more resilient to scientific notions even though there is a clear line to progress. “Whoever conceals his transgressions will not prosper, but he who confesses and forsakes them will obtain mercy.” Proverbs 28:13 (King James Bible, 1769/2017). This particular quote makes me think of therapy sessions and how they must be directed in order to obtain the best result possible. Offenders must be willing to be open and honest in t