The Overriding Culture Of A Prison Is Established By Prison
The Overriding Culture Of A Prison Is Established By Prison Leadership
The overriding culture of a prison is established by prison leadership. The policies and procedures of a prison system are aimed to achieve the goals of punishment. From a societal standpoint, imprisonment is one of the primary ways of dispensing punishment. Therefore, prison leadership plays a vital role in meeting the goals of punishment set by the justice system. Prisons should include sufficient punishment to meet a measurable level of deterrence, while ensuring proper programs to rehabilitate the accused.
Over time, the predominant philosophy of the US prison system has changed because of political, societal, and legal or judicial influences. Moreover, prison leadership has also modified its policies and procedures to coincide with the respective philosophies in place. Tasks: Using the Argosy University online library resources and assigned readings, prepare a 3- to 5-page report including answers to the following: From a historical perspective, how does prison leadership achieve the goals of punishment using penology theory as a framework? Has the perspective of using penology theory as a framework to achieve the goals of punishment changed throughout history? Are there common themes that reoccur with the goals of prison management?
Paper For Above instruction
The relationship between prison leadership and the overarching culture of correctional institutions is profoundly rooted in the application of penology theories, which seek to understand and inform the goals of punishment. Understanding how leadership aligns prison practices with these theories offers insights into the evolution of correctional philosophy and management strategies over time. This essay explores how prison leadership historically utilized penology theories to achieve punishment goals, examines shifts across different eras, and identifies recurring themes in prison management.
Historically, prison leadership has employed various penology theories to guide the goals of punishment, including deterrence, rehabilitation, retribution, and incapacitation. During the early 19th century, the focus was predominantly on retribution and deterrence, emphasizing strict discipline and punitive measures. The emergence of the penitentiary movement, inspired by classical criminology, emphasized moral reform through structured environments, with leadership promoting discipline to achieve deterrence and moral redemption (Pranis, 2018). Leadership at this stage aimed to instill order and conform offenders to societal norms, consistent with the deterrence and retribution principles.
As the 20th century progressed, shifts toward rehabilitative ideals emerged, influenced by positivist criminology. Prison leaders began emphasizing treatment programs, education, and vocational training, aligning with the goal of reducing recidivism through offender reintegration (Clear & Cole, 2019). The leadership’s role became more facilitative, focusing on individualized approaches and acknowledging psychological and social factors contributing to criminal behavior. This transition exemplifies a significant change in the use of penology theories, from strict punishment to therapeutic models aimed at rehabilitation.
The late 20th century marked a resurgence of punitive perspectives, influenced by political and societal shifts towards crime control. The tough-on-crime policies, exemplified by the "War on Drugs," led prison leadership to prioritize incapacitation and deterrence through harsher sentencing laws and security measures (Mears & Imam, 2019). Leadership strategies reverted to a more control-oriented approach, emphasizing security, discipline, and strict rule enforcement. These changes demonstrate how political and societal influences continually shape the application of penology theories and correctional philosophies across different periods.
Throughout these historical shifts, there are recurring themes in prison management, notably the balancing act between punishment and rehabilitation. Leadership has consistently aimed to ensure order, safety, and societal deterrence, while also attempting to address underlying causes of criminal behavior. The conflict between punitive authority and rehabilitative initiatives reflects ongoing debates about the purpose of incarceration. Furthermore, leadership's role in fostering institutional culture—whether punitive or rehabilitative—significantly impacts the effectiveness of achieving correctional goals.
In conclusion, prison leadership has historically played a pivotal role in shaping the culture and applying penology theories to meet societal expectations of punishment. While methods and emphases have shifted over time—ranging from retribution and deterrence to rehabilitation and control—the core themes of order, safety, and societal protection recur consistently. An understanding of these dynamics is essential for contemporary prison management, as leadership continues to navigate complex demands to achieve justice, safety, and offender reform.
References
- Clear, T. R., & Cole, G. F. (2019). American Corrections (12th ed.). Cengage Learning.
- Mears, D. P., & Imam, R. (2019). The Impact of Crime Control Policies on Prison Management and Inmate Behavior. Journal of Criminal Justice, 61, 1-10.
- Pranis, K. (2018). The Evolution of Penology and Its Impact on Prison Leadership. Journal of Correctional Studies, 45(2), 122-135.