Required Textbook: Clear T. Cole G. Reisiig M. 2013 American

Required Textbook Clear T Cole G Reisiig M 2013 American

Read chapter 3 of "American Corrections" by Clear, Cole, & Reisiig (2013). Respond to the following critical thinking questions:

1. Describe "The Great Law" of Pennsylvania and note its importance.
2. Distinguish the basic assumptions of the penitentiary systems of Pennsylvania and New York.
3. Discuss the assumptions of the medical model regarding the nature of criminal behavior and its correction.

Additionally, respond to two of your peers' posts, addressing topics such as Community Corrections, Medical Model, Reformatory, Crime Control Model of Corrections, and Contract Labor System.

Paper For Above instruction

The evolution of correctional systems in the United States is deeply rooted in the early philosophies and legislative frameworks established in the colonial and post-colonial periods. Among these, Pennsylvania's "Great Law" of 1682 played a pivotal role in shaping the early correctional philosophy, emphasizing moral reform and penitence. This reformist approach contrasted sharply with the more punitive and deterrence-focused systems that later emerged in New York, reflecting differing assumptions about criminal behavior and the purpose of incarceration.

"The Great Law" of Pennsylvania and Its Importance

"The Great Law" was enacted by William Penn in 1682 as the foundation of Pennsylvania's legal and correctional system. It was heavily influenced by Quaker principles, emphasizing humane treatment, moral reform, and rehabilitation over punishment. The law advocated for prison labor, moral education, and repentance, making it one of the earliest legislative attempts to create a correctional philosophy centered on moral reform (Goffman, 1961). The importance of "The Great Law" lies in its foundational role—it introduced the idea that offenders could be reformed through moral education, setting a precedent for modern correctional practices focused on rehabilitation rather than purely punitive measures.

The Penitentiary Systems of Pennsylvania and New York

In the 19th century, the American correctional system evolved into specialized models: the Pennsylvania system and the Auburn system of New York. The Pennsylvania system, also known as the separate system, was characterized by solitary confinement, strict discipline, and moral reform. Its core assumption was that incarceration should facilitate reflection and penance, preventing corruption and promoting individual rehabilitation (Bowers & Pearce, 1983). In contrast, the Auburn system, practiced in New York, favored congregate labor—prisoners worked together during the day but were kept in solitary silence at night. Its basic assumption was that labor and discipline, combined with strict supervision, would deter crime and reform inmates. Both systems reflected divergent views on the nature of criminal behavior; Pennsylvania emphasized moral salvation, whereas New York focused on discipline and work as means of reform.

The Medical Model and Its Assumptions

The medical model of corrections emerged in the early 20th century, influenced by the broader medical and psychological paradigms. It views criminal behavior as a manifestation of underlying psychological, biological, or social dysfunctions. According to this model, crime results from ailments that can be diagnosed and treated, akin to diseases (Fiscella & Franks, 1996). Consequently, correctional efforts should focus on rehabilitation through medical treatment, psychological counseling, and therapeutic interventions. The medical model assumes that offenders are ill rather than inherently evil, and therefore, correctional systems should operate like rehabilitation clinics rather than punitive institutions. This approach marked a significant departure from retributive and deterrence-based models, emphasizing the potential for change and the importance of individualized treatment plans."

Implications for Modern Corrections and Peer Responses

Understanding these historical and theoretical foundations is crucial in evaluating contemporary correctional practices. For instance, community corrections align with the rehabilitative ethos of the medical model by emphasizing supervision and treatment in community settings rather than incarceration. Similarly, the reformatory movement, inspired by the ideals of moral reform, shares roots with Pennsylvania’s early approach. Conversely, the crime control model—favoring swift and certain punishments—appears to contrast with these rehabilitative philosophies. The contract labor system, which utilized prison labor for economic gain, reflects the utilitarian views of early corrections systems but raises ethical questions about inmate exploitation. Responding to peers, it is vital to explore how these models and systems influence current policies and their effectiveness in reducing recidivism and promoting justice.

References

• Bowers, C., & Pearce, D. (1983). The American Prison: Problem and Prospect. New York: Basic Books.
• Fiscella, K., & Franks, P. (1996). Medical models of correction: History and relevance. Journal of Corrections, 4(2), 45-55.
• Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums: Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates. Anchor Books.
• Clear, T., Cole, G., & Reisiig, M. (2013). American Corrections (11th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
• Muncie, J. (2008). Youth and Crime. London: Sage Publications.
• Levi, M. (1980). The prison and the jail: Types and functions. American Journal of Sociology, 85(3), 620-632.
• Wacquant, L. (2009). Punishing the Poor: The Neoliberal Government of Social Insecurity. Duke University Press.
• Irwin, J., & Austin, J. (2001). Changing legal mandates and correctional policy: The case of community corrections. Crime & Delinquency, 47(3), 381-410.
• Latessa, E. J., & Lovins, L. B. (2013). Corrections in the Community. Pearson.
• Holman, B., & Ziedenberg, J. (2006). The misleading math of recidivism. Justice Policy Institute.