Adaptation of Generic Rehabilitation Programs
In one respect, rehabilitation programs have to be universal to demonstrate maximal effectiveness, as their main purpose lies in assisting all types of criminals in social reintegration. Universality, in this context, means the possibility to classify a particular offender and then identify the techniques and approaches that are the most relevant in his or her case. Among the parameters to assess is the risk of recidivism, the nature of the deviant behavior, the presence or absence of mental disorders, and the typical crime patterns (Gideon & Sung, 2010). The outcomes of the analysis underlie the treatment techniques to apply so that the rehabilitation reduces the probability of further offense. The approaches vary from one category to another; thus, violent, sexual, and juvenile criminals require dissimilar treatment, as the root causes of their actions are different as well (ibid.). Therefore, it is possible to state that the programs theoretically are quite adjustable to various offender populations.
In practice, however, the degree of the unification apparently is higher than it should be for maximally effective risk management, which results from the dramatic lack of research in certain areas. The relatively small overall amount of female criminals in comparison with males, for instance, is the reason why the origin of their behavior is underinvestigated (Gideon & Sung, 2010). Juvenile and intimate offenders are the other examples that remained beyond the researchers’ attention until recently; regarding mental disorders, in-prison diagnostics of those is not sufficiently precise at the current stage (ibid.). Consequently, many programs apply standardized approaches, in fact, most of which are designed for adult, male, and mentally healthy offenders. This determines the need for additional research in the problematic areas to make rehabilitation various, not only in theory.
The above drives the conclusion that to be adaptable to the specialties of a diverse offender population, rehabilitation programs doubtlessly should be gender-specific. This rests on assuming the dissimilar origin of male and female crime, which actually has evidence. Thus, Messina et al. (2010) mention that “women offenders report higher rates of childhood trauma and abuse” than men do (p. 97). These umbrella terms may involve interpersonal violence, a post-traumatic stress disorder, chronic bodily or mental health issues, homelessness, and other. In one respect, it is quite probable that males do not survive those less frequently in comparison with females but are less likely to speak about their traumas. However, this actually serves to prove the psychological dissimilarity of genders, which makes different approaches to the treatment necessary. In addition, certain experiences that can influence the human psyche, such as a problematic pregnancy or impotence, are unique.
Considering the latter nuances, it is not reasonable to neglect gender in the rehabilitation of offenders. The importance of specific approaches has grown in recent decades, together with female incarceration rates, which have increased around the globe by 53% since the year 2000 (Saxena & Messina, p. 1). In the United States, the number of women in prisons exceeded 230,000 in 2019; this is 7 times more in comparison with the 1980s (ibid). Such a substantial addition doubtlessly requires an adequate response from the penitentiary system, whose task, as said above, lies in ensuring that offenders will perform their social functions adequately after release to allow for security. Applying unsuitable approaches to almost a quarter of a million people cannot be an appropriate solution due to not reducing the recidivism risk.
References
Gideon, L., & Sung, H-E. (2010). Rethinking corrections: Rehabilitation, reentry, and reintegration. SAGE.
Messina, N., Grella, Ch. E., Cartier, J., & Torres, S. (2010). A randomized experimental study of gender-responsive substance abuse treatment for women in prison. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 38(2), 97-116. Web.
Saxena, P., & Messina, N. (2021). Trajectories of victimization to violence among incarcerated women. Health & Justice, 9, article 18. Web.