Urgent issues and prospects in correctional rehabilitation practice and research

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to identify some of the urgent issues currently confronting criminal justice policymakers, researchers and practitioners. To this end a diverse group of researchers and clinicians have collaborated to identify pressing concerns in the field and to make some suggestions about how to proceed in the future. The authors represent individuals with varying combinations of criminal justice research, professional training (e.g. social work, criminal justice, criminology, social work, clinical psychology) and clinical orientation, and experience. The paper is comprised of 13 commentaries and a subsequent discussion based on these reflections. The commentaries are divided into the categories of explanation of criminal behaviour, clinical assessment and correctional intervention, and cover issues ranging from the role of clinical expertise in treatment, problems with risk assessment to the adverse effects of social oppression on minority groups. Following the commentaries, we summarize some of their key themes and briefly discuss a number of major issues likely to confront the field in the next 5–10 years.

Effectiveness of a program for the development of socio-emotional competences in people admitted to a penitentiary center

“…Given the need to reduce the risk of recidivism, mitigate all the possible negative health effects, and fully promote the re-education and subsequent labor and psychosocial reintegration of inmates, the scientific community has designed a variety of treatment programs for the prevention of criminal behavior ( 2 , 15 – 20 ). There are many models in the literature that have tried to provide an answer to criminal behavior, with two particular ones standing out: the RxNxR (risk-need-responsivity) model by Andrews and Bonta ( 21 ) and the GLM (Good Lives Model) by Ward et al ( 20 ).…”

“…Given the need to reduce the risk of recidivism, mitigate all the possible negative health effects, and fully promote the re-education and subsequent labor and psychosocial reintegration of inmates, the scientific community has designed a variety of treatment programs for the prevention of criminal behavior ( 2 , 15 – 20 ). There are many models in the literature that have tried to provide an answer to criminal behavior, with two particular ones standing out: the RxNxR (risk-need-responsivity) model by Andrews and Bonta ( 21 ) and the GLM (Good Lives Model) by Ward et al ( 20 ). The first model, designed by Andrews and Bonta ( 21 ), attempts to explain the individual differences in criminal behavior by addressing the influences in the closest social, cultural, and family context, as well as the individual's personal variables (biological, psychological, cognitive, behavioral, educational, etc.).…”

“…The second model, designed by Ward et al ( 20 ), proposes a prison re-education theory using the legislative, ethical, and criminological framework of human rights. These rights help to discern the most basic human needs of prisoners, identify appropriate lifestyles, and facilitate prison environments that are more respectful and humane to prisoners ( 17 ).…”

“…Therefore, this model proposes moving from a therapeutic and rehabilitative view of human rights in general to the specific right to education and teaching. As such, as an alternative, this approach offers an idea that is based not only on the reduction of risk factors but also on enabling inmates with the resources they need to live a better lifestyle ( 20 ).…”

Walking the line: What can analog studies teach us about children’s memories of abusive incidents?

“…For forensic investigators and legal decision-makers who must evaluate children’s testimony, it is critically important to determine whether the worrying contamination described by Principe and London (2022) also happens when children are describing salient, intrusive, embarrassing, and personally meaningful experiences of victimization and abuse (Lamb & Thierry, 2005; Ward et al, 2022) and whether the contamination is as great when the children are older. Laboratory studies have examined memory for conversation using different paradigms.…”