Readings on Correctional Programming: Needs, Interventions, and Approaches

470 Pages·2021·59.727 MB·English

by  Mateja Vuk & Brittani A. McNeal

READINGS ON ——
CORRECTIONAL
PROGRAMMING
NEEDS, INTERVENTIONS, AND APPROACHES

6 Re
o
L
: B
a
«
Ge
ay
= core ey MATEJA VUK AND BRITTANI A. MCNEAL
LE
Co
@®eEDITION #¢ cognella’ | ANTHOLOGY SERIES FOR TEACHING
READINGS ON CORRECTIONAL
PROGRAMMING
READINGS ON CORRECTIONAL
PROGRAMMING
NEEDS, INTERVENTIONS, AND APPROACHES
FIRST EDITION
Edited by Mateja Vuk and Brittani McNeal
University of West Georgia
Bw Cognella
SAN DIEGO.
Bassim Hamadeh, CEO and Publisher
‘Micka Portier, Field Acquisitions Editor
Tony Paese, Project Editor
Alia Bales, Production Editor
Abbie Goveia, Graphic Design Assistant
‘Trey Soto, Licensing Coordinator
Natalie Piccotti, Director of Marketing
Kassie Graves, Vice President of Editorial
Jamie Giganti, Director of Academic Publishing
Copyright © 2021 by Cognella, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted,
or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including pho-
tocopying, microfilming, and recording, or in any information retrieval system without the written permission of Cognella,
Inc. For inquiries regarding permissions, translations, foreign rights, audio rights, and any other forms of reproduction, please
contact the Cognella Licensing Department at [email protected].
‘Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks and are used only for identifica-
tion and explanation without intent to infringe.
Cover copyright © 2019 iStockphoto LP/AnnaStills.
Printed in the United States of America.
#P cognellar | sass
0 SorWyo Bs. 5 Son Biga CAS2I21
CONTENTS
PREFACE ix
INTRODUCTION xiii
Unit I The Rationale for Correctional
Programming 41
Reading 11 Offender Reentry as a Moral Choice 3
Trevor Fronius, Anthony Petrosino, and Sarah Guckenburg
Reading 1.2 Beyond Correctional Quackery—Professionalism and
the Possibility of Effective Treatment 17
Edward J. Latessa, Francis T. Cullen, and Paul Gendreau
Reading 1.3 The Use and Impact of Correctional Programming for
Inmates on Pre- and Post-Release Outcome 31
Grant Duwe
Unit1 Discussion Questions 69
Unit II Programming by Setting and Delivery ”
Reading 2.1 Understanding the Special Challenges Faced by the
Correctional Counselor in the Prison Setting 73
William N. Elliott and Jeffrey L. Schrink
Reading 2.2 Halfway Houses 91
Gail Caputo
Reading 2.3 Putting the “Community” in Community
Corrections: Partnerships That Provide Valuable
Assistance 105
Todd G. Woodward
Unit 2. Discussion Questions 109
Unit Ill Programming by Offender Populations 41
Reading 3.1 Treating Sexual Offenders 13
David Lester and Gail Hurst
Reading 3.2 Treating Substance Abuse in Offender
Populations BK
Patricia Van Voorhis, Myrinda Schweitzer, and Gail Hurst
Reading 3.3 Treating Severely Antisocial and Psychopathic
Offenders 155
Emily J. Salisbury
Reading 3.4 Juvenile Offenders 169
Debra DePrato and Stephen W. Phillippi
Unit 3 Discussion Questions 199
Unit IV Programming by Risks and Needs 201
Reading 4.1 The Risk-Need-Responsivity Model of Offender
Assessment and Treatment 203
James Bonta and Don A. Andrews
Reading 4.2 Risk Assessment Variables 213
Valerie R. Bell
Reading 4.3 Young Offenders 253
Sharon Casey, Andrew Day, James Vess, and Tony Ward
Unit 4 Discussion Questions 265
Unit V Treatment Interventions and
Approaches 267
Reading 5.1 Cognitive Therapies 269
Patricia Van Voorhis and David Lester
Reading 5.2 Social Learning Models 295
Patricia Van Voorhis and Emily Salisbury
Reading 5.3 Radical Behavioral Interventions 315
David Lester, Michael Braswell, and Patricia Van Voorhis
vi
Reading 5.4 Family Therapy 339
Patricia Van Voorhis and Michael Braswell
Reading 5.5 Early Approaches to Group and Milieu
Therapy 373
David Lester and Patricia Van Voorhis
Unit Discussion Questions 399
Unit VI Educational, Vocational, and Work
Programs 401
Reading 6.1 Maximizing Benefits of Correctional Educational
Programs: Best Practices 403
M.C. Esposito, Anthony H. Normore, and Arthur A. Jones
Reading 6.2 Idleness and the Importance of Work in
Prison 47
Mateja Vuk and Brittani A. McNeal
Reading 6.3 Vocational Training in Juvenile Detention: A Call for
Action 425
Edward J. Ameen and Debbiesiu L. Lee
Unit 6 Discussion Questions 433
Unit Vil Faith-Based and Recreational
Programs 435
Reading 7.1 Faith-Based Programming: Salvation to
Reintegration 437
DuAne Young and Mike Judnick
Reading 7.2 Recreation 441
Jorge Antonio Renaud
Reading 7.3 Refrain from Prison: How the Texas Prison Music
Program Connected the Incarcerated and “The Free”
Legends and Life in Texas: Folklore from the Lone
Star State 445
Ruth Massingill, Mel Strait, and Emily Jones.
vii
Reading 7.4 Emphasizing Health and Wellness at the Louisiana
Correctional Institute for Women 457
Anita Rowe Collins
Unit 7 Discussion Questions 463
CONCLUSION 465
viii
PREFACE
he “tough-on-crime” movement that started in the 1960s and continued
well into the 1990s led to a reduction in funding for rehabilitation programs,
services, and inmate privileges (Johnson et al. 1997; Wunder 1995). In the early
1990s, more than 60% of amenities and recreational opportunities were eliminated
in prisons across the country (Wunder 1995). Likewise, with the passing of the
Zimmer Amendment of 1996, recreational opportunities were restricted in federal
institutions (Bureau of Prisons 2008). At the same time, prison overcrowding and
budget constraints prioritized security over programs (Cullen et al. 2000; Wunder
1995). While the decreased number of programs as well as the number of inmates
who participate in them is clear even today (Grattet et al. 2009; Petersilia 2003),
the American public wants inmates to spend their time constructively, and they
endorse access to many amenities and programs (Applegate 2001; Johnson et
al. 1997; Wozniak 2016). It is also accepted among scholars that giving inmates
access to productive services and resources that normalize the prison environment
humanizes their incarceration experience (Andrews and Bonta 2010; Van Voorhis
and Salisbury 2014).
It is easy to think that because they broke the law, offenders do not deserve to
live in humane or comfortable conditions. However, allowing inmates to partic-
ipate in programs does not mean making prisons lenient. In other words, prison
rehabilitation does not mean being “soft on crime.” No prisons, even those with
a good number of programs, are comfortable. In fact, correctional programming
is about promoting public safety. Quality correctional programs make everybody
safer because they reduce recidivism. Studies show that effective correctional
programs, such as cognitive-behavioral programs, can reduce recidivism up to 30% (Lipsey
and Cullen 2007). Correctional programs help with reentry because they also improve other
aspects of inmate behavior. They give inmates knowledge and skills (social, academic, and
vocational) that help them in finding jobs more easily after their release. Even participation
in recreational programs is beneficial. For example, one study reported that inmates who
participated in sports had more employment opportunities after release, and sports helped
them develop new contacts in the community and stay focused and motivated to desist from
crime (Meek and Lewis, 2014). Finally, programming reduces violence in prison and helps
correctional staff to manage inmates easier. In fact, lack of programming and pervasive
idleness leads to increased levels of violence within the institution and, in extreme cases,
riots (Cohen 1976; Hassine et al. 1996; Irwin 1980; Parisi 1982).
Contrary to what some people might think, many inmates are motivated to improve their
behavior. Research shows that inmates generally report having a goal they want to achieve
during their incarceration (e.g., obtaining education or behavioral change); and many see
prison as an opportunity to turn their lives around (Comfort 2008; Crewe et al. 2016; Visher
and Travis 2003; Zamble and Porporino 1988). For those who have plans for their future, their
key goals after prison are to change their behavior and adhere to conformist values such as
work, family, and social integration (Carvalho et al. 2015). Studies show that self-improve-
ment through the development of social, educational, and vocational skills is particularly
important for female inmates (Lord 2008; Owen 1998; Sexton 2012).
Not all programs are equally effective in achieving these goals. The development of qual-
ity prison programs requires a thorough consideration of research that shows what the best
correctional practices look like. It is also important that programming follows the standards
of effective treatment and therapeutic interventions. This book provides an overview of
best correctional practices and standards for effective correctional rehabilitation. It offers a
perspective that is rooted in empirical evidence and in the need for corrections to become
an evidence-based profession.
This anthology is also unique because it is the only book specifically tailored toward cor-
rectional programming. It was developed as a counterpoint to other books that focus only
on rehabilitative programming and interventions, but fail to discuss vocational and educa-
tional programs; or they provide an overview of correctional interventions for, but do not
focus on unique needs of different offender populations. This is the first book that covers all
the relevant aspects of correctional programming, which makes it a “single point” resource
for anybody who wishes to gain theoretical and empirical knowledge on programming in
institutional and community corrections.
References
Andrews, D. A. and J. Bonta. “Rehabilitating Criminal Justice Policy and Practice.” Psychology,
Public Policy, and Law 16, no. 1 (2010): 39-55.