Recidivism

8 Key excerpts on "Recidivism"

• 

  eBook - ePub

  Criminal Recidivism

  Explanation, prediction and prevention

  • Georgia Zara, David P. Farrington, David Farrington(Authors)
  • 2015(Publication Date)
  • Willan

    (Publisher)

  bias of impunity). What makes it even more problematic is that rates of Recidivism depend on how it is defined and measured.

  Recidivism is defined in different ways, using diverse criteria and starting points. Following the research literature (Maltz, 1984), common meanings of Recidivism include: (1)  rearrest, which also includes reoffending despite having a prior criminal record; (2)  reincarceration, which includes return of released offenders to custody or to jail; (3)  reconviction for a new offence.

  In some situations Recidivism is also considered as the failure to complete educational or vocational courses or treatment programmes in or out of prison/jail custody, or during probation, and also the failure to respond to parole conditions accordingly, or the probation revocation, or unsatisfactory termination or rule violation. This variety in Recidivism definitions does not allow for an always comparable analysis of data and studies.

  Reoffending

  Reoffending is the most commonly used term internationally employed for Recidivism – where a person, who has received some form of criminal justice sanction (such as conviction or caution), commits another offence within a set time period. Greenfeld (1985) stated that approximately two-thirds of all criminal offenders are recidivists, though this estimate is likely to differ depending on how Recidivism is conceptualised and measured. Even though Recidivism rates differ depending on whether the focus is on behaviour during the incarceration term, or on behaviour during the post-release phase, or on successful completion of probation or parole, or failure or interruption of programmes, among the above different ways of defining Recidivism the most used indicators of it are rearrest, revocation of parole or probation, reincarceration and reconviction (Champion, 1994).

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Remaking Relapse Prevention with Sex Offenders

  A Sourcebook

  • D. Richard Laws, Stephen M. Hudson, Tony Ward(Authors)
  • 2000(Publication Date)
  • SAGE Publications, Inc

    (Publisher)

  Definition of Recidivism First , we must defin e which typ e of behavio r is considere d a reoffense . Amon g th e possibilitie s ar e th e following: (a) a reconvictio n for th e sam e typ e of sexua l aggressio n (agains t a child or a woman) , (b) a reconvictio n for an y typ e of sexua l aggression , (c) a reconvictio n for an y sexua l offense (a sexuall y aggressiv e act or a sexua l nuisanc e crim e such as exhibitionis m or voyeurism) , (d) a reconvictio n for an y violent offenses (e.g., assault , murder) , and (e) a reconvictio n for an y crimina l offense. Accordin g to Furby , Weinrott , an d Blacksha w (1989), it is advisabl e to defin e recidivis m as th e recommissio n of an y sex offense (p. 8). Althoug h thi s suggestio n seems appropriate , Rice an d Harri s (1997) noted tha t becaus e of plea bargainin g and difficultie s in deter -minin g motivation , th e categorizatio n of offenses as sexua l or not , is mor e methodologicall y difficul t tha n is categorizin g them as violent (p. 239). Fur -thermore , accordin g to Quinsey , Harris , Rice, and Cormie r (1998), Althoug h overinclusive , violent recidivis m is likely to captur e significantl y mor e sex-ua l reoffense s tha n th e mor e commonl y used sexua l recidivis m definition (p. 129). On th e othe r hand , becaus e th e predictor s correlate d with sexua l recid -ivism and thos e correlate d with nonsexua l violent recidivis m ar e only partiall y th e sam e (Hanso n & Bussiere , 1998), an undifferentiate d analysi s of thes e two type s of recidivis m is questionable . Thes e two most frequentl y used definition s Methodologica l Issue s 468 THE BOTTOM LINE of Recidivism in sexual aggressors have both strengths and weaknesses, and fur-ther studies are therefore necessary to clarify this controversy. Measuremen t of Recidivism The most conservative operational measurement of Recidivism is a reconviction listed in police records.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  An Introduction to Criminal Psychology

  • Russil Durrant(Author)
  • 2018(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  Chapter 12 , although punishment is an essential component of our efforts to manage crime, by itself it does little to change offending behaviour. Indeed, the experience of imprisonment may well, in itself, be criminogenic. What, then, can be done with offenders to make them less likely to re-offend? In this chapter we first consider the problem of offender Recidivism and risk assessment. We then explore approaches to the rehabilitation of offenders focusing on the different types of programme that have been developed. We then examine the available literature on offender effectiveness, before exploring two prominent models or theories of offender rehabilitation – the risk-need-responsivity model and the good lives model. On completion of this chapter you should have a good understanding of what offender rehabilitation is and whether it is effective in reducing re-offending.

  THE PROBLEM OF OFFENDER Recidivism

  Recidivism, or re-offending, remains a persistent problem: it is widely recognised that a significant proportion of offenders that are arrested and punished for a given offence re-offend within three to five years of serving their sentence. This is clearly illustrated in a comprehensive study of Recidivism in the United States for two cohorts of offenders: one that was released from prison in 1999 and another that was released from prison in 2004 (Pew Centre on the States, 2011). The researchers found that of the cohort that was released in 1999, 45.4 per cent were re-imprisoned within the next three years, and for those released in 2004 the comparable figure was 43.4 per cent. In other words, close to half of all prisoners released in the United States during this period re-offended and were re-imprisoned within three years of their release.

  Rates of re-offending do vary somewhat across countries and by offence type. Clearly rates of re-offending are also sensitive to the time frame of the follow-up period and the criteria involved for re-offending (some studies measure re-arrest or re-conviction rather than re-imprisonment). Figure 13.1 , for instance, illustrates re-conviction and re-imprisonment rates for a sample of close to 5,000 offenders in New Zealand who were released from prison in 2002/2003 and were followed up for a five-year period (Nadesu, 2009). As you can see, rates of re-conviction and re-imprisonment differ significantly by offence type with individuals imprisoned for dishonesty offences most likely to re-offend. This study also illustrated that rates of re-offending vary by gender and age. For instance, 71.4 per cent of men were re-convicted after five years compared to 62 per cent of women, and close to 88 per cent of those under 20 were re-convicted compared to only 41.7 per cent of those aged 40 and above. Of course, these various figures almost certainly underestimate the total amount of Recidivism because they do not capture those individuals who offend but are not apprehended (or who are apprehended but not prosecuted) by the criminal justice system. These figures also reinforce the point made in Chapter 12

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Social Prevention and the Social Sciences

  Theoretical Controversies, Research Problems, and Evaluation Strategies

  • Günter Albrecht, Hans-Uwe Otto, Günter Albrecht, Hans-Uwe Otto(Authors)
  • 2010(Publication Date)
  • De Gruyter

    (Publisher)

  These two theory groups explaining Recidivism can be described in two models, which can be regarded as ideal types. In the first model, it is assumed that the reasons for the first criminal act are the same as for further criminal acts. In the second model, Recidivism is postulated to have its own dynamic. This dynamic, however, is explained differently in the various theories as being due to: a change in the offender's self-esteem, an adaptation into the criminal subculture, learning patterns of criminal behavior, a change in the value-orientation patterns or action competences, a restriction of the possibilities of actions, or a deteriora-tion of the socioeconomic situation. Both models are shown in Figure 2. Static model Recidivism. Recidivism 2 Recidivism; l_ t ========c._ d_l Dynamic model Criminal ~ Recidivism. ~ Recidivism 2 -Q--... ~ Recidivism; acts Fig. 2: Theoretical explanation of Recidivism Hence, in some ways the theories make strongly contradictory claims (Albrecht, 1983). Empirical research in this field has not yet led to clear or satisfying answers to these questions (Kerner, 1985), although considerable efforts have been made. Friedheim Berckhauer and Burkhard Hasenpusch found more than 140 empirical publications on Recidivism published before 1982 -and this was only in West Germany (1982, p. 284). This paper concentrates on a comparison of the efficiency of the two models shown in Figure 2. It presents a criticism of the criminal policy that has Incarceration and Recidivism 541 resulted from these theories. Consequently, the pretension to be made is limited. The test of the manifold possible causes of being convicted of a crime is limited to the analysis of (primary and secondary) socialization deficits and psychological deficits. But these two variables are in accordance with those that are usually used in the empirical research on Recidivism.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Prisoner Reentry in the Era of Mass Incarceration

  • Daniel P. Mears, Joshua C. Cochran(Authors)
  • 2014(Publication Date)
  • SAGE Publications, Inc

    (Publisher)

  3 In many experiences in life, repeating an effort that previously failed, and then repeating it again and again in the face of failure, constitutes grounds for needless frustration. When we focus on prisons, we can see clear grounds for frustration. We have individuals who go to prison repeatedly. They do not really go; rather, our courts send them. Yet, on the face of it, prison appears to achieve little, given that over three-fourths of released prisoners will be rearrested and that an even higher percentage reoffend.

  The concern only increases when we realize the limited utility of a binary measure of reoffending—or rearrest, reconviction, or reincarceration—as a way of assessing incarceration effects. For example, if, prior to incarceration, an individual committed 10 crimes per year and then, after prison, committed only five crimes per year, a significant improvement has occurred. Yes, offending still occurred, but the amount of criminal activity clearly declined. This idea constitutes a central insight of scholarship on desistance. The interest, from a desistance perspective, lies with identifying turning points in the amounts of offending over time.

  4

  Regardless, we remain left with the problem that, however measured, Recidivism occurs with regularity among the vast bulk of ex-prisoners. There should be little surprise at this fact. The individuals who go to prison typically constitute a select group, with lengthy histories of offending, strain-filled lives, low self-control, drug abuse and mental illness, residence in poverty-stricken areas, and more. We should, therefore, anticipate that the likelihood of reoffending would be high. In addition, within the prison population, a spectrum of individuals exists who lie at the right end of the bell curve distribution. Here, we find individuals who simply may have more exposure to a range of criminogenic factors or who have an accumulation of risk factors, including biological or genetic characteristics, that greatly increase the likelihood of offending. We can expect these individuals to be even more likely to offend.

  In the end, we are left knowing that most people who enter prison come from and will return to lives at the margins of society. They face difficult times and have characteristics that make Recidivism likely. Some of them are especially at risk of offending. We would like to identify these individuals accurately. We want especially to identify those at the most risk of committing more crime. Identifying such individuals entails, however, much error.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Sex Offenders

  A Criminal Career Approach

  • Arjan A. J. Blokland, Patrick Lussier(Authors)
  • 2015(Publication Date)
  • Wiley-Blackwell

    (Publisher)

  Sexual Recidivism has been widely used in sex offending research for various purposes, such as assessing the risk of reoffending, identifying risk factors of persistence, creating actuarial tools for risk assessment and risk prediction, identifying high-risk sex offenders, imposing specific legal measures such as indeterminate sentences, determining the impact of treatment programs, and examining the impact of sentencing and other penal measures. We seriously doubt that future research will provide additional and significant information to the existing body of scientific literature on sexual Recidivism. This book provides a template for researchers and policymakers that addresses the need to broaden the scope of empirical investigations aiming to describe, explore, and explain the criminal behavior of sex offenders. The criminal career approach template guides researchers and policymakers in approaching the problem of sexual offending by breaking down the phenomenon of interest into multiple parameters: prevalence, age of onset, frequency, continuity from adolescence to adulthood, (de-)escalation, specialization, persistence in adulthood, and desistance.

  Sexual Recidivism, or whether or not an offender has been rearrested

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Criminal Psychology

  A Beginner's Guide

  • Ray Bull, Claire Cooke, Ruth Hatcher(Authors)
  • 2009(Publication Date)
  • Oneworld Publications

    (Publisher)

  The choice of which indicator of treatment success (or failure) to use is also an important consideration in this type of research (which is often called treatment–outcome research). Most research in this area uses reconviction (either ‘reconvicted’ or ‘not reconvicted’) as the measure by which treatment success or failure is evaluated. While this indicator is useful from a policy perspective, it is only an approximation of reoffending. Someone who completes a programme may have subsequently committed a dozen or more crimes but as he or she was not caught and reconvicted, it would appear that the programme was effective. Conversely, the programme could have reduced the severity or frequency of an individual’s offending behaviour but the crude measure of reconviction would not detect this positive change. Some researchers have tried to counter these problems by utilizing self-report information from the individuals themselves or asking their family, friends and other associates about the individual’s behaviour. This type of research, however, can be time-consuming, expensive to conduct and is only ever as good as the accuracy of the reports received.

  Assessment of offenders

  As mentioned above, it is clear from the research findings of the last twenty years or so that not all treatment programmes will reduce Recidivism rates for all offenders, and that some programmes of rehabilitation may be more effective with certain types of offenders than with others. For example, it stands to reason that an offender who has been caught committing a residential burglary may not be responsive to a treatment programme which aims to address aggressive behaviour. If the burglar does not display aggressive behaviour, or if aggressive behaviour does not relate to his or her offending behaviour, then a programme with aggression as its main treatment target is not going to equip the burglar with the necessary skills to stop burgling homes.

  Similarly, someone who has a long history of offending or has been convicted of a serious offence (such as a violent or sexual offence) may have different treatment needs from someone who has been caught committing an offence for the very first time. Those offenders who have made crime their way of life may only benefit from a more intense intervention which addresses a range of needs. Their behaviour may well be more engrained than that of the first time offender and hence a greater depth of behaviour modification is needed.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Sexual Predators Amongst Us

  • Ronald A. Rufo(Author)
  • 2011(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  Prison alone may not be the most effective treatment to keep a sex offender from reoffending. Freeman-Longo (2000) stated that most incarcerated sex offenders often reoffend but expressed that with proper treatment, there is a strong possibility that the chances of reof-fending can be reduced. A variety of issues that should be addressed after a sex offender is released from prison: • Monitoring the offender’s actions and whereabouts • Ensuring that court-ordered mental health treatment takes place • Monitor and adjusting treatment (what works and what does not work) • Victim protection • Sex offender registration Recidivism What will it take for that deviant behavior of a sexual offender to subside? When it is safe to release a sex offender back into society? Is there a solution to stop repeat offenders from reoffending? A study by Carich, Kassel, and Stone (2001) revealed and warned that a complete and reliable cure for sex offenses does not exist. The consensus of most people is that sexual predators and sexual offenders are destined to reoffend. My study has come to the same conclusion, also illustrating that sex offenders will often fabricate the reasons they were arrested and justify their actions, rarely blaming themselves. According to most studies, Recidivism rates for sex offenses are often far higher than those for other crimes. The Department of Justice Center for Sex Offender Management indicates that Recidivism may occur when there is a new arrest, a new conviction, or new commitment to custody. Some studies use the return to prison as the standard for determining Recidivism. Two sep-arate and significant reasons why a sex offender is returned to prison are that he or she has been (1) convicted of another sexual crime, or (2) rearrested Incarceration, Recidivism, and Rehabilitation 155 because of a technical breach that violates conditions of release.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book