An Examination of the Impact of Criminological Theory on Community Corrections Practice
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
December 2016 15 An Examination of the Impact of Criminological Theory on Community Corrections Practice James Byrne University of Massachusetts Lowell Don Hummer Penn State Harrisburg CRIMINOLOGICAL THEORIES ABOUT parole officers in terms of practical advice; to other community corrections programs are to why people commit crime are used—and mis- the contrary, we think a discussion of “cause” is be successful as “people changing” agencies. used—every day by legislative policy makers critical to the ongoing debate over the appro- But can we reasonably expect such diversity and community corrections managers when priate use of community-based sanctions, and flexibility from community corrections they develop new initiatives, sanctions, and and the development of effective community agencies, or is it more likely that one theory— programs; and these theories are also being corrections policies, practices, and programs. or group of theories—will be the dominant applied—and misapplied—by line commu However, the degree of uncertainty on the influence on community corrections practice? nity corrections officers in the workplace as cause—or causes—of our crime problem in Based on recent reviews of United States cor they classify, supervise, counsel, and con the academic community suggests that a rections history, we suspect that one group of trol offenders placed on their caseloads. The certain degree of skepticism is certainly in theories—supported by a dominant political purpose of this article is to provide a brief order when “new” crime control strategies are ideology—will continue to dominate until overview of the major theories of crime causa introduced. We need to look carefully at the the challenges to its efficacy move the field— tion and then to consider the implications of theory of crime causation on which these new both ideologically and theoretically—in a new these criminological theories for current and initiatives are based. It is our view that since direction. We may—or may not—be at such a future community corrections practice. Four each group of theories we describe is appli- watershed point in the United States today. See distinct groups of theories will be examined: cable to at least some of the offenders under Table 1 below. classical theories, biological theories, psy correctional control in this country, interven chological theories, and sociological theories tion strategies will need to be both crime- and 1. Classical Criminology of crime causation. While the underlying offender-specific, if probation, parole, and Why do people decide to break the law? assumptions of classical criminology have been used to justify a wide range of sentencing TABLE 1. and corrections policies and practices over the An Overview of Criminological Theories past several decades, it is also possible to iden tify the influence of other theories of crime Classically-based criminologists explain criminal behavior as a conscious choice by individuals causation on corrections policies and practices based on an assessment of the costs and benefits of various forms of criminal activity. during this same period. As we examine each Biologically-based criminologists explain criminal behavior as determined—in part—by the group of theories, we consider how—and presence of certain inherited traits that may increase the likelihood of criminal behavior. why—the basic functions of probation and Psychologically-based criminologists explain criminal behavior as the consequence of individual parole officers change based on the theory of factors, such as negative early childhood experiences and inadequate socialization, that result in crime causation under review. criminal thinking patterns and/or incomplete cognitive development. When considering the link between theory Sociologically-based criminologists explain criminal behavior as primarily influenced by a and practice, it is important to remember the variety of community-level factors that appear to be related—both directly and indirectly—to following basic truth: Criminologists disagree the high level of crime in some of our (often poorest) communities, including blocked legitimate about both the causes and solutions to our opportunity, the existence of subcultural values that support criminal behavior, a breakdown of crime problem. This does not mean that crim community-level informal social controls, and an unjust system of criminal laws and criminal inologists have little to offer to probation and justice. 16 FEDERAL PROBATION Volume 80 Number 3 To a classical criminologist, the answer is be linked to tougher sentencing policies, while sex offenders, based on the belief that if these simple: The benefits of law breaking (such as three quarters of the decline have been attrib offenders know they are being monitored, money, property, revenge, and status) simply uted to other factors (such as the economy, they will be less likely to re-offend. The use outweigh the potential costs/consequences of education, and immigration). of electronic monitoring for sex offenders, getting caught and convicted. When viewed A careful review of the evaluation research domestic violence offenders, and others on from a classical perspective, we are all capable on the latest wave of deterrence-oriented probation and parole has been justified using of committing crime in a given situation, but community-based sanctions does not support similar logic. However, the research reviews we make a rational decision (to act or desist) the notion that increased surveillance and on the effectiveness of electronic monitoring based on our analysis of the costs and benefits control reduces recidivism (that is, an offend do not support this strategy (Byrne, 2016). of the action. If this is true, then it is certainly er’s likelihood of rearrest, reconviction, and/ A good example of how classical crimi possible to deter a potential offender by (1) or re-incarceration). There are two possible nology can be applied in the community developing a system of “sentencing” in which explanations for these findings: (1) the under corrections field is found in David Farabee’s the punishment outweighs the (benefit of the) lying assumptions of classical criminologists monograph, Reexamining Rehabilitation. In crime, and (2) ensuring both punishment (i.e., most people are rational, and weigh this review, Farabee offered several recom certainty and celerity through efficient police the costs and benefits of various acts in the mendations for corrections reform that focus and court administration. “Classical” theories same manner) are wrong (e.g., people com on deterrence-based intervention strategies. of criminal behavior are appealing to criminal mit crimes for emotional reasons, because of He argued that since his review of the avail justice policy makers, because they are based mental illness, and/or because they believe the able research reveals that a prison sentence on the premise that the key to solving the criminal act is justified, given circumstances does not either deter or rehabilitate offenders, crime problem is to have a strong system of and prevailing community values); or (2) the we need to reconsider our current reliance formal social control. In other words, the clas current sentencing strategies and community on this sentencing strategy. While the use of sical theorist believes that the system can make corrections programs need to be even tougher incarceration can be justified for those vio a difference, regardless of the myriad of indi and deterrence-oriented (in other words, the lent offenders who require control through vidual and social ills that exist. During the past theory is correct; it just has not been imple incapacitation, it cannot be justified using four decades, a number of federal, state, and mented correctly). the logic of offender change (through deter local programs have been initiated to improve In the short run, it appears that policy mak rence or rehabilitation). Because prison does the deterrent capacity of the criminal justice ers and program developers favor the latter not appear to deter non-violent offenders, he system, including proactive police strategies explanation; prison populations and incarcer believes that we need to experiment with the to ensure greater certainty of apprehension, ation rates in the United States remain among use of deterrence-based community-supervi priority prosecution/speedy trial strategies the highest in the world (Byrne, Pattavina, & sion strategies, not only as a sentencing option to ensure greater celerity (speed) in the court Taxman, 2015), while community corrections but also as a response to offenders who refuse process, and determinate/mandatory sentenc populations and probation rates also remain to comply with the conditions of community ing strategies to ensure greater punishment high, and continue to use multiple condi supervision. The key features of Farabee’s certainty and severity. To further our deter tions that emphasize surveillance and control model are highlighted below in Table 2. rent aims, we have significantly increased our (through drug testing, electronic monitoring, Perhaps the most intriguing component institutional capacity during this same period curfews, and now social media monitoring). of the above strategy is the recommendation and passed legislation that includes manda For example, in the name of deterrence, that offenders under community supervision tory minimum periods of incarceration for legislation has