The Wiley International Handbook of Correctional Psychology

Devon L. L. Polaschek, Andrew Day, Clive R. Hollin, Devon L. L. Polaschek, Andrew Day, Clive R. Hollin

• Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell
• Year: 2019
• Print ISBN: 9781119139690, 9781119139683
• eBook ISBN: 9781119139973
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: Forensic Psychology
• Index: Psychology

A two-volume handbook that explores the theories and practice of correctional psychology

With contributions from an international panel of experts in the field, The Wiley International Handbook of Correctional Psychology offers a comprehensive and up-to-date review of the most relevant topics concerning the practice of psychology in correctional systems. The contributors explore the theoretical, professional and practical issues that are pertinent to correctional psychologists and other professionals in relevant fields.

The Handbook explores the foundations of correctional psychology and contains information on the history of the profession, the roles of psychology in a correctional setting and examines the implementation and evaluation of various interventions. It also covers a range of topics including psychological assessment in prisons, specific treatments and modalities as well as community interventions. This important handbook:

• Offers the most comprehensive coverage on the topic of correctional psychology
• Contains contributions from leading experts from New Zealand, Australia, Europe, and North America
• Includes information on interventions and assessments in both community and imprisonment settings
• Presents chapters that explore contemporary issues and recent developments in the field

Written for correctional psychologists, academics and students in correctional psychology and members of allied professional disciplines, The Wiley International Handbook of Correctional Psychology provides in-depth coverage of the most important elements of the field.

Part I
Correctional Psychology in Context

1
Correctional Psychology: A Short History and Current Standing

Devon L. L. Polaschek

University of Waikato (Te Whare Wānanga o Waikato), New Zealand

Andrew Day

James Cook University and University of Melbourne, Australia

Clive R. Hollin

University of Leicester, UK

Correctional psychology is much practiced, but rarely defined. Contemporary correctional systems have employed psychologists for many years now, but it is by no means easy to describe the professional roles of those who work in correctional settings.¹ Additional challenges have arisen that followed the introduction of legislation that defines psychologists as allied health practitioners (Allan, 2013), given that some, if not most, of the work that correctional psychologists do does not fall neatly into the category of a health service. It is also the case that correctional practice does not always closely align with the academic research and teaching of psychology that underpins it (Brodsky, 2007; Clements et al., 2007). And, to complicate matters even further, the term correctional psychology has a number of different meanings; it not only refers to professional psychologists who practice in corrections, but also to the wider application of psychology to corrections, and the use of psychological research to inform correctional policy and practice. The term is defined, in part, by public and correctional staff perceptions about what psychology is, and its perceived utility in the correctional system, as well as perceptions more generally about the status and utility of science, what causes crime, and what works to reduce it. Unsurprisingly then, correctional psychologists are sometimes uncertain about their professional identity, and may find themselves practicing in environments that are hostile to their ways of working.

This Handbook represents the efforts of many people who have expertise in correctional psychology, and, collectively, their contributions help define what correctional psychology represents in practice, and identify how it can contribute to more effective correctional service delivery. We recognize at the outset the importance of compiling a resource that will inspire and support the next generation of psychologists who want to make a difference, as well as reminding experienced practitioners that this is an exciting and important field.

Today's correctional systems can be understood in terms of their primary role to administer sentences that are handed down by the criminal courts. But although correctional psychology has sometimes been defined as applying only to convicted offenders (e.g., Morgan, Beer, Fitzgerald, & Mandracchia, 2007), correctional agencies have a secondary mandate to safely contain people who are remanded in various forms of custody while they await trial or sentencing. Correctional psychology has also often been defined primarily in relation to work that occurs in prisons (Biere & Mann, 2017; Gendreau & Goggin, 2013; Magaletta, Patry, Dietz, & Ax, 2007), despite correctional systems in most countries having responsibility for the administration of both custodial and community sentences.

It is also instructive to reflect on what it is that correctional psychologists actually do in practice, even though this varies in emphasis across jurisdictions. In the USA, for example, Dvoskin and Morgan (2010) have proposed that the role typically involves three main activities: (a) the treatment of mentally disordered offenders and the provision of mental health treatment; (b) the rehabilitation of offenders for the purposes of reducing criminal risk and improving community safety; and (c) the smooth and safe running of the correctional system itself. In other Western countries, there are clearer boundaries between those who work with mentally disordered offenders—which remains for the most part the province of mental health systems—and those who work to rehabilitate offenders for risk reduction purposes (Soothill, Rogers, & Dolan, 2008). A further consideration is the extent to which correctional psychologists practice directly with offenders or are responsible more widely for the application of psychology by other parts of the correctional system (e.g., in the selection or training of prison officers or by advising on prisoner management or sentence compliance). Contributions in each of these areas can assist the correctional system to achieve its legislative mandate, which can be best understood in terms of the broad aims of containing, punishing, and reforming offenders, with the main differences between jurisdictions lying largely in the emphasis placed on each (see Table 1.1). Importantly though, all three aims are linked to outcomes that are potentially measurable in terms of human behavior. So, while psychology does not generate all of the knowledge needed for correctional systems to achieve these respective aims, it clearly has something to contribute to each.

Table 1.1 Examples of the Purposes, Objectives, and Missions of Several Western Correctional Systems, as Enshrined in Legislation

Federal Correctional System, Canada

The purpose of the federal correctional system is to contribute to the maintenance of a just, peaceful, and safe society by acarrying out sentences imposed by courts through the safe and humane custody and supervision of offenders; and bassisting the rehabilitation of offenders and their reintegration into the community as law‐abiding citizens through the provision of programs in penitentiaries and in the community. (Corrections and Conditional Release Act, 1992)

Corrective Services, New South Wales, Australia

This Act has the following objects: to ensure that those offenders who are required to be held in custody are removed from the general community and placed in a safe, secure, and humane environment, to ensure that other offenders are kept under supervision in a safe, secure, and humane manner, to ensure that the safety of persons having the custody or supervision of offenders is not endangered, to provide for the rehabilitation of offenders with a view to their reintegration into the general community. Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 No. 93

New Zealand Department of Corrections

The purpose of the corrections system is to improve public safety and contribute to the maintenance of a just society by ensuring that the community‐based sentences, sentences of home detention, and custodial sentences and related orders that are imposed by the courts and the New Zealand Parole Board are administered in a safe, secure, humane, and effective manner; and providing for corrections facilities to be operated in accordance with rules set out in this Act and regulations made under this Act that are based, amongst other matters, on the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners; and assisting in the rehabilitation of offenders and their reintegration into the community, where appropriate, and so far as is reasonable and practicable in the circumstances and within the resources available, through the provision of programmes and other interventions; and providing information to the courts and the New Zealand Parole Board to assist them in decision‐making. (New Zealand Corrections Act 2004)

We start by providing a brief overview of the history of correctional practice, which serves to remind us of how different systems can be, depending on how human behavior is understood. This approach helps us to position current practice in the broader context of community responses to antisocial behavior and law‐breaking, and takes us into the modern era, with its focus on the development of psychological rehabilitation programs.

A Brief History of Correctional Trends

Punishment

In any society, the dominant explanation for the causes of an offender's wrongdoing will play a role in determining how that society deals with the individual offender. One of the oldest explanations for criminal behavior lies in possession by evil spirits and demons. In Christianity at least, this belief in demonic possession sat alongside, not unsurprisingly, a corresponding belief in the omniscient power of God. These twin beliefs formed the basis for the practice of trial by ordeal. Given that God would always intervene on behalf of the innocent—the principle of judicium Dei, a judgment by God in favor of the guiltless—it was believed that in a trial, which literally threatened life and limb, the innocent would emerge unscathed while the guilty would suffer or die.

For example, this reasoning underpinned trial by ordeal through fire or water in tenth‐century Saxon Europe, until it was banned by the Church in 1215 AD. In “ordeal by fire” the accused was forced to grasp a red‐hot iron or to walk over red‐hot metal; in “ordeal by water” the accused was forced to pluck by hand a stone from boiling liquid, or to drink poisoned water, or to be submersed in water. Another form of trial, “trial by combat,” was common in sixteenth‐century Europe. In this ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Table of Contents
• About the Editors
• Notes on the Contributors
• Part I: Correctional Psychology in Context
• Part II: The Roles of Psychology in Managing Prisons and Offenders
• Part III: Foundational Knowledge of Offending and Offenders
• Part IV: Intervention: Theory, Design, Implementation, and Evaluation
• Part V: Assessment
• Part VI: Treatment: Specific Populations and Problems
• Part VII: Treatment: Modalities and Approaches
• Part VIII: Community Interventions
• Index
• End User License Agreement