Download PowerPoint - GEOCITIES.ws

Chap 8
What is the current "rehab movement" about what drives it and who funds it?
Not Liberal - rehab in prison - not diversion
Federally funded - focus on in-prison drug treatment
(Multi-billion dollar industry created by Federal grants!)
Chap 8
What are the authors’ two criteria for evaluating
the effectiveness of prison-based programs?
1. Significant and long lasting effects - must “work”
(More effective than “aging out”??)
2. Potential for wide use with prisoners -Not just the best prospects
(net widening problem and “return on investment”)
Chap 8
Why are the "highly touted" treatment programs
declining as prison pops grow?
1. Programs are expensive - seen as “soft on crime”
2. Programs don’t work - relapse & recidivism rates
Note: Even if they worked, they would have little
effect on crime rates - most crime is not by ex-cons
Chap 8
What are the main factors related to criminal
behavior (and how do they interact)?
Stabilizing
aging
job
marriage
children
and
De-stabilizing factors:
social stress/poverty
isolation
alcohol/other drugs
Chap 8
"What does work" (page 165-167)?
Martinson
“nothing works”
vs.
Palmer
some programs work
Well designed, well implemented, well administered,
and correctly evaluated programs can work.
** Berk & Rauma study in 1980s (bottom page 163)
money and jobs!!
**(NYT Illinois article)
Chap 8
What are the main arguments for boot camps?
“Punishment builds character” + cheaper than prison
What does the research indicate?
Improve attitudes while in
(stability??)
Don’t improve recidivism
(back to unstable environ)
Note: Just another grant-driven industry??
Note: aftercare programs might help
Chap 8
What are main arguments for and assumptions
about prison drug treatment programs?
CASA - Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse
Note: Lying with statistics
Will take a closer look at this later.
Chap 8
What is "sample selection bias"?
“In house” eval
vs.
“Success rates” based on
selecting best prospects
- don’t count dropouts.
Short term effects only.
Biased
External/prof eval
Based on randomized
matched groups.
All subjects
Long term effects
Unbiased
Chap 8
What are the authors' four conclusions?
1.
2.
3.
4.
No impact on overall/serious crime rates.
Effects of treatment on indivs are mixed.
Most programs poorly designed & too small.
No reliable evidence of “macro” success.
(also last paragraph is very important).
Chap 8
** Last paragraph
page 179-180
Rehab in prison is still “good” for two reasons:
1. help some prisoners turn their lives around
2. humanize prisons
But rehab should not be used to justify imprisonment
(conservative approach)
Chap 8
Drug treatment in prison - a closer look
(mostly follows authors’ discussion)
Drug treatment nationwide is an $8 billion a year
industry with an active set of political lobbyists
to ensure the flow of money.
Promise is to reduce/eliminate serious crime.
“If something sounds too good to be true...”
Chap 8
CASA claims make sense at first
- based on cost-benefit analysis
Cost of treatment is high ($6000 per prisoner,
$6 billion to treat 1 million prisoners)
But preventing a huge amount of crime will save
much more than that in the long run!
So, it is worth the “investment”!
Chap 8
Based on 3 assumptions
(p. 170)
First assumption - Most prisoners are drug users and
drugs cause most crime - 100 crimes a year each.
If this were true, virtually all crime would be committed
by untreated drug users released from jails/prisons
(100 million crimes!!)
The authors show the absurdity of this claim.
Chap 8
CASA vastly over-est “caught offender” rates
(+ most caught offenders age out without treatment)
Also, remember the low clearance rates more than 90% of crime done by people who
don’t get caught.
Using more realistic assumptions - 10% reduction in
crime IF all prisoners are treated
AND if the
treatment works (long-lasting effects!).
Chap 8
Second assumption - treatment for all prisoners:
authors show why this doesn’t make sense either
25% have no drug problem
25% are in jails - too short-term for drug treatment
25% are in medical facilities, working, full-time educ
No more than 25% are available for drug treatment
- and some of these don’t want treatment
- coercive or voluntary??
Chap 8
So, if treatment works, 10% reduction (caught
offenders) becomes 2 or 3% (1/4 of 10% caught).
Third assumption - does treatment work??
Weak evidence that it works for those who want it and
who complete the programs - but the studies are not
very reliable and even at that treatment doesn’t work
much better than doing nothing at all (aging out).
+ large proportion typically don’t complete program!
Chap 8
Bottom line
(realistic assumptions)
If 10% of offenders get caught and incarcerated,
and 1/4 of those are available for drug treatment,
and drug treatment works about half the time,
Result would be about a 1% reduction in crime!
Why is the drug treatment industry taken seriously??
Political myths about drugs and crime?
Chap 8
So neither conservative (present) drug treatment
nor liberal drug treatment have much potential for
lowering crime rates - but diversion programs
and voluntary treatment can help by helping some
prisoners improve themselves and by humanizing
the prisons.
Note: I think education programs like the one in
Texas are a much better investment.