Ethics Test #3 Review

Focuses on the specific individual who committed the crime

Focuses on general prevention of a crime by making examples of specific individuals

- Mills

- The end result

- Aristotle

- The end result but also "moral man"

- Kant

- The act itself

Approximately 1.2%

• - Prison (LWOP)
•   • $52/day = ~20k/year = $900k for 35 years

• - Death Row
•   • ~$2.5 to $5 million

- ~60% (or 37%) of all US executions take place in Texas

• Before a person is actually sent to prison/jail
• Guilty but suspended sentence
• If compliant
• If not compliant

• After a defendant is released from prison
• Many of the same controls or safeguards as probation

- Housing, job placement, counseling, education

- Drug testing, curfew, location monitoring

• • Probation Effectiveness Varies by State
•  - Over half arrested within 2 years
•    ○ 20-65% rearrested within 2 years

• • Parole Effectiveness Also Varies
•  - Slight advantage over release directly from prison

• • Reduced caseload, greater supervision, more contact
• • No Difference between intense and routine supervision
• • Ethical Concerns
•  - Letter of the law vs spirit of the law
•  - Privacy issues
•  - Social worker or police
•  - Unending supervision
•  - Prison easier
•  - Cost & class bias

• Probation/Parole officers overworked
• Spread thin v. help the "helpable" and ignore the rest

• For Privatizing:
• • Private enterprise can do things more efficiently
• • Privatizing reduces costs
• • Design carefully devised contract
•   - Monitor implementation

• Against Privatizing:
• • Government can be efficient/effective
• • Profit motive debase corrections
• • Client "shopping"
• • Contract termination - need another provider ready and willing to step in
• • Who will monitor contract
• • Ethical considerations

• • Responsible to Use Volunteers in the First Place?
•  - To save money/replace probation & parole officers
•   ○ Reduces jobs for professional corrections
•   ○ Clients do not receive professional assistance
•   ○ Volunteers sufficiently trained, supervised, accountable 

• - To supplement probation/parole program
•   ○ May enhance program
•   ○ Establish "one on one" relationships with offenders
•   ○ Volunteers may have special skills/training

• • Victims
•  - How do you feel?
•  - What do you need to move toward wholeness?

• • Community
•  - How was the community harmed? 
•  - How was the community responsible?
•  - How can the community repair any damages?

• • Offender
•  - Why did you choose crime?
•  - What will make the choice less likely in the future
•  - What can you do to repair the harm you caused?

• • "Just the facts, ma'am"
•  - What happened
•  - Who did it
•  - What does the person deserve

• • Encounter between victim & offender
•  - With trained facilitator
•   ○ May be in person or via letter, video 3rd party
•  - Discuss event, the harm & how to set things right

• • Repair the harm
•  - Offender does what he/she can to make things right
•   ○ Restitution, apology, changed behavior, acts of generosity, etc.

• • Transformation
•  - Offender become contributing member of society
•  - Victim can heal and thrive
•  - Increased informal social control
•   ○ Communities "police" themselves

• • Fewer people struggling with aftermath of crime
•  - Less PTSD (post traumatic syndrome?)
•  - Revenge less likely
•  - Return to "normal"

• • Hold responsible party (parties) personally responsible
•  - Takes courage

• • Trying to reduce future crimes
•  - Parties may learn from event

• Inefficient

• Offender/victim may refuse to participate 

• Victim "requests" may be unreasonable/irrational/impossible

• Harm may be irreparable

• What about victimless crimes 

• • May wind up with very disparate "sentences"
•  - CRJ System loses control

• Need both systems

• What about "disorganized" communities

• - Employee
• - Violation of Rules
• - Personal Gain

• • Theft/Embezzlement
•  - From . . . Prison/inmates

• • Trafficking in Contraband
•  - Ex. Drugs, weapons, money, cell phones

• • Misuse of authority
•  - Ex: gratuities, perjury, abuse

• • Misc
•  - Ex: sleep/drunk on duty, condoning above

• • Opportunity
•  - Discretion

• • Incentive
•  - Internal vs. External

• • Internal
•  - Safety
•  - Morale
•  - Ethics

• • External
•  - Public Image
•  - Finances

• • Standards
•  - Uniformly known
•  - Consistently applied
•  - Non-selective enforced

• • Awareness/Openness
•  - ID opportunities
•  - Increase risk for corrupt practices
•  - Whistleblower mechanism

• • Fewer opportunities for education and training
•  - Equal treatment education & training?

• • Additional Services
•  - 85-90% have history of domestic & sexual abuse
•  - Parental & reproductive rights

• • Admin & Officers
•  - 37% of adult correctional personnel
•  - 51% of juvenile correctional personnel

• • Issues
•  - Safety
•  - Sex
•  - Glass Ceiling

• • US Population: 
•  - 69% White, 13.5% Black, 17% Hispanic

• • Prison Population:
•  - 33% White, 40% Black, 20% Hispanic

• 30-77% higher recidivism rate

• No deterrent effect

• "Crime College"

• What's the Point:
•  - Incapacitation
•  - Rehabilitation
•  - Threat to society
•  - Cost

• • ~50% of inmates suffer from mental illness
•  - 3.7% psychotic illness
•  - 10% major depression
•  - 65% personality disorder

• • Mental Health Treatment
•  - 1/3 prison mates
•  - 1/6 jail inmates

• - Educational
• - Religious
• - Counseling
• - Enhancement