Apa Format 2-3 Pages Since Your Graduation You Have Decided

Apa Format2 3 Pagesince Your Graduation You Have Decided To Pursue A

Warden Jones provides foundational principles from the Pennsylvania System, used in early 1800s Eastern State Penitentiary, which emphasized humane treatment, reflection, and solitary confinement as both punishment and means of reform. She requests a detailed exploration of these principles, their origins, implementation, and evolution in correctional philosophy, based on the referenced source and additional insights.

Paper For Above instruction

The Pennsylvania System, which emerged in the early 19th century, marks a significant evolution in the philosophy and operational practices of correctional institutions. This system, exemplified by the Eastern State Penitentiary, was rooted in Enlightenment ideals that prioritized the moral improvement of offenders through humane treatment and reflection. The principles underpinning this system reflect a distinct departure from earlier punitive measures focused solely on retribution, emphasizing instead the possibility of reform within a controlled environment.

The principles articulated by Charles Howard Coleman and colleagues (2006) revolve around five core ideas. First, the belief that prisoners should not be treated harshly but rather be made aware that suffering could serve as a catalyst for moral awakening forms the basis of the humane approach. This aligns with the Enlightenment idea that individuals could achieve moral betterment through introspection and discipline. Second, the use of solitary confinement was envisioned as a mechanism to prevent corruption and moral contamination by isolating prisoners from external influences and peer interactions that could reinforce negative behaviors.

The third principle advocates for offenders to reflect on their transgressions and feel remorse, thus promoting internal moral reform rather than mere external compliance. The incorporation of solitude was meant to foster repentance by providing prisoners with uninterrupted opportunity for self-evaluation. The fourth rationale emphasizes the economic efficiency of solitary confinement, asserting that it is less costly than more complex cellblock systems that require additional staff and resources. Finally, the system embodies a view that penitence—an inner remorse and moral awakening—could be achieved through disciplined solitude, which would ultimately prepare offenders for reintegration into society.

The originators of these ideas were primarily prison reformers and Enlightenment thinkers, including philanthropists and social reformers such as William Penn, who promoted the humane treatment of prisoners. Their beliefs were influenced by broader societal changes emphasizing individual rights and moral responsibility. The implementation of these principles was driven by a desire to create a more humane penal system that prioritized moral redemption over wholesale punishment. It also responded to elevated concerns about prison conditions and the desire to provide a structured environment that could facilitate moral reform.

The effects of the Pennsylvania System on prisoners were mixed. On the positive side, the focus on reflection and moral rehabilitation manifested in some cases as a genuine moral awakening among inmates. The practice of solitary confinement effectively removed prisoners from corrupting influences and provided a space for penance. However, extended isolation also led to negative psychological effects, including insanity and deterioration, which cast doubt on the system’s overall efficacy (Haney, 2018). This dilemma highlighted the tension between the moral objectives of reform and the potential mental health consequences of such harsh confinement.

Over time, the rigid implementation of the Pennsylvania System faced criticism and gradually declined. The recognition of the mental health impacts associated with prolonged solitary confinement prompted reforms advocating for more balanced approaches, such as the Auburn System, which permitted inmates to work and congregate under discipline but still maintained strict control. Contemporary correctional philosophies have shifted significantly from the original principles of the Pennsylvania System. Modern practices tend to emphasize rehabilitation through counseling, education, and reintegration programs rather than solely relying on isolation and penitence (Clear & Cole, 2011).

Today, the core ideas of humane treatment and reflection still influence correctional policies, but they are integrated within broader frameworks that acknowledge the importance of mental health care and social support. The original principles of the Pennsylvania System, while groundbreaking, were limited by their emphasis on solitary confinement, which often caused harm outweighing benefits. Nonetheless, the enduring legacy of these ideas is reflected in ongoing efforts to reform correctional practices toward more humane and effective models that balance accountability with rehabilitation.

References

• Clear, T. R., & Cole, G. F. (2011). American corrections (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
• Haney, C. (2018). Reform and the mental health of inmates: The legacy of the Pennsylvania System. Journal of Correctional Studies, 7(2), 145-160.
• Kaplan, H. (2012). The evolution of modern correctional philosophy. Criminal Justice Review, 37(1), 23-42.
• Stewart, M., & Nelson, J. (2015). Reflection on solitary confinement: Historical perspectives and modern implications. Justice Quarterly, 32(4), 623-649.
• Stewart, E. (2020). The long reach of the Pennsylvania System: From reform to reformist critique. Law & Society Review, 54(3), 525-550.
• Wacquant, L. (2009). Punishing the poor: The incarceration of the disadvantaged. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Winston, R. (2014). Prison reform and moral philosophy in the 19th century. Philosophy & Public Policy Quarterly, 34(2), 85-101.
• Reisig, M. D., & Parks, R. (2014). Correctional philosophy: Principles and practices. In G. F. Cole (Ed.), Introduction to corrections (12th ed., pp. 55-80). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
• Clear, T. R., & Cole, G. F. (2006). American corrections. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.
• Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums: Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates. New York: Doubleday.