Criminal Justice

—Alarid, textbook author, writes that “the most common used measure of program or treatment effectiveness is the rate of recidivism”. Why can this type of measurement be problematic? In a 1-to-two page(s) explain with factual backing (that is references) this position.

Community-Based Corrections, 12th Edition
by Leanne Fiftal Alarid
Cengage, 2018
ISBN-13: 978-1337687362

ANSWER

Recidivism

Recidivism cannot be used as a standard measure for the success of justice system intervention because of certain fundamental flaws that accompany it. When used as the only measure of effectiveness, recidivism can be misleading for policymakers and should therefore not explicitly be used for such purposes (Butts & Schiraldi, 2018). Recidivism encourages inappropriate comparisons of populations that are not similar. Recidivism focuses policy on negative facets rather than positive outcomes. The criminal justice system should focus on positive outcomes like the effectiveness of reentry after incarceration. Using recidivism to measure the effectiveness of the system tends to assume such essential positive outcomes (Campbell et al., 2018).

Focusing on recidivism as evidence of effectiveness confuses a complex, bureaucratic indicator of the effectiveness of community corrections with a simple measure of rehabilitation and individual behavior. The bureaucratic contribution to recidivism is often overlooked when the concept is used to determine the effectiveness of justice intervention. The system of administration of justice might hold a bureaucratic factor in determining recidivism (Silver et al., 2020). For instance, suspects who appear submissive are more likely to receive lenience from law enforcement while contemptuous ones are likely to face harsh treatment (Butts & Schiraldi, 2018).

Communities of color may be disadvantaged because of the different ways in which policing is conducted in the community. Policing practices are more stringent for communities of color than white people. Chances of people of color falling into recidivism are high because of over-policing. Therefore, using recidivism as a measure for the effectiveness of community policing does not offer the complete picture of the issue. When recidivism is the key factor put into consideration in the determination of community policing success, other vital outcomes such as employment, education, and housing are ignored (Yuan & Luo, 2021).

References

Braga, A. A., Brunson, R. K., & Drakulich, K. M. (2019). Race, place, and effective         policing. Annual review of sociology, 45, 535-555.

Butts, J. A., & Schiraldi, V. N. (2018). Recidivism reconsidered: Preserving the community         justice mission of community corrections.

Campbell, C. M., Abboud, M. J., Hamilton, Z. K., vanWormer, J., & Posey, B. (2018).     Evidence-based or just promising? Lessons learned in taking inventory of state            correctional programming. Justice Evaluation Journal, 1(2), 188-214.

Silver, I. A., Cochran, J. C., Motz, R. T., & Nedelec, J. L. (2020). Academic Achievement and     the Implications for Prison Program Effectiveness and Reentry. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47(7), 848-866.

Yuan, C., & Luo, X. (2021). A negotiation analysis of risk assessment in community correction   from the perspective of exchange structure. Language and Dialogue.