Table of Contents
Introduction
The juvenile correctional facility is equated to a training school or a residential institution offering programs fit for the juvenile offenders. There are more than one hundred outcome measures based on the program-based standards within the correction facilities. Such tests indicate the extent, to which the institutions’ performances and services meet the safety standards, order, health and mental health services, security, reintegration, programming, social support and connection with the family (Champion, 2001). The focus of this paper, therefore, is on probation and parole as well as elaborating on the effective and the ineffective programs in juvenile corrections.
Probation and Parole
Criminals’ juveniles that are found guilty of particular offences are subject to the sentencing and are supposed to serve their sentences in juvenile correctional facilities. However, probation and parole, which is dependent on the judge’s ruling as per the magnitude of the offense, are privileges that may prevent the offender from seeing the inside of jail while serving their sentences or released from prison after serving some time. The judge grants probation as an alternative to a jail sentence. Under such circumstances, the probationer lives freely within the community but must abide by certain set conditions (Champion, 2002). On the other hand, parole is a program granted to an offender after serving a certain percentage of their sentences in prison. Likewise, there are set conditions that the parolees must abide by for the continuation of the program. Additionally, it is crucial to note that parole is not allowable to particular offenders such as those who committed first-degree murder, arson, rape, drug trafficking, and kidnapping (Abadinsky&Abidinsky, 2000).
Treatment Programs
The treatment programs are meant to assist the offenders to change behavior away from the offense that they committed. It is, however, imperative to say that not all the treatment programs are effective in ensuring change among the offenders. The effective programs can be reported to meet the intended outcome while the ineffective applications have been determined to deliver limited desired result when imposed on the juvenile offenders. For instance, punishment increases recidivism by two percent and therefore considered an ineffective treatment program. Additionally, the sacred straight programs, boot camps as well as extensive custodial facilities are the other programs that are determined to be weak in juvenile correction (Greenwood, 2008). Conversely, the cognitive behavioral therapy performed alongside multi-systemic therapy has proven to one of the most effective programs in reducing recidivism among the juvenile offenders. The other useful programs include blueprints for violence prevention initiative, multi-dimensional treatment foster care, project towards TND, functional family therapy, multi-systemic therapy as well as EPICS (effective practices in community supervision) (McMasters, 2015).
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is imperative to note that juvenile correction programs have outcome measures pegged to them to determine their contribution to changing the character of the individual offenders. Additionally, probation and parole are privileges that are bestowed upon the offenders concerning their serving of the sentences. Lastly, the effectiveness of the programs that are implemented within the juvenile correctional facilities is determined by reduced recidivism.
- Abadinsky, H., &Abidinsky, H. (2000). Probation and parole: Theory and practice. Prentice Hall.
- Champion, D. J. (2001). The juvenile justice system: Delinquency, processing, and the law. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Champion, D. J. (2002). Probation, parole, and community corrections. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Greenwood, P. (2008). Prevention and intervention programs for juvenile offenders. The future of Children, 18(2), 185-210.
- McMasters, A. (2015). Effective Strategies for Preventing Recidivism Among Juveniles.