About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

45 Fed. Probation 45 (1981)
Offender Rehabilitation: The Appeal of Success

handle is hein.journals/fedpro45 and id is 287 raw text is: Offender Rehabilitation: The Appeal of Success BY PAUL GENDREAU, PH.D., AND ROBERT ROSS, PH.D.* ORRECTIONAL workers have been repeatedly told that their efforts at offender rehabilita- tion are unlikely to be profitable. The pun- dits have stated that correctional rehabilitation programs have been tried, tested, and found want- ing. They have been advised that research has demonstrated that treatment of delinquent and adult offenders is an ineffective response to criminal behavior; that according to Martinson (1976) nothing works. While Martinson's conclusion was the most widely disseminated and the most popularized, his rallying cry for the antirehabilitation zealots was supported by the conclusions of many others: ... there is no evidence to support any program's claim to superior rehabilitative efficacy (Robison & Smith, 1971); ... no delinquency prevention programs can be definitely recommended (Wright & Dixon, 1977): . .. evidence supporting the ef- ficacy of correctional programs is slight, inconsis- tent, and of questionable reliability (Bailey, 1966). Such pronouncements have served to engender feelings of pessimism, hopelessness, and even worthlessness among correctional workers. The nothing works conclusion did not go un- challenged. Rather, it sparked a long and heated debate throughout the criminal justice system about the effectiveness of correctional interven- tion. In the field of criminal justice, few questions have stimulated so much controversy. The debate raged (literally) for more than 10 years and had ma- jor impact not only on criminological theory, criminal justice policy, and correctional service. It stimulated the development of new correctional models such as radical nonintervention and justice as fairness (cf. Empey, 1979). In large measure, these were viewed as palatable alternatives to the much criticized medical disease model which was thought to provide the underpinnings for correc- tional treatment. Moreover, it provided support for corrections' swing to the right (not necessarily, correct) as exemplified by demands for a return to fixed sentences, sure and swift *Dr. Gendreau is regional co-ordinating psychologist (E), On- tario Ministry of Correctional Services, Burritt's Rapids, On- tario, Canada. Dr. Ross is professor, School of Criminology, University of Ottawa. punishment and deterrence. Other factors, of course, were at play such as the growing conser- vatism of North American Society and the economic pressures that faced correctional managers who were hard pressed to provide funds for expensive treatment programs which seemed to pay limited dividends. Effective Correctional Programming Ironically, now that the dust thrown up during the debate has begun to settle, it is becoming in- creasingly apparent that the antitreatment move- ment in corrections was based on a faulty premise: the assumption that treatment does not work. That conclusion has more and more been called into question. Even Martinson changed his views on the matter (cf. Martinson & Wilks, 1977; Serrill, 1975). The contention that treatment has been a failure is simply wrong. As a matter of fact, as Palmer noted (1975), Martinson in his original work identified a substantial number of successful programs. Confirmation of the potency of correctional treatment was obtained in our recent reviews (Gen- dreau & Ross, 1979; Gendreau & Ross, 1981; Ross & Gendreau, 1980) of the correctional literature from 1973 to 1980. (Almost all of the conclusions about treatment ineffectiveness were based on pre- 1967 research!) Our examination of the literature revealed a substantial number of treatment pro- grams which have been demonstrated in methodologically impressive research to be effec- tive in offender rehabilitation. We did not find panaceas, but we did find clear evidence that some treatment programs when applied with integrity to appropriate target populations can be effective in preventing crime and/or in reducing recidivism. As we noted in our reviews the results of these ef- fective programs were not trivial. Reductions in recidivism ranged from 30 to 60 percent in some well-controlled studies. They were not short-term effects. Positive results were found for as long as 3 to 15 years after treatment! They were not limited to one correctional setting. Successful results were found in community-based diversion programs, probation programs, and in institutional programs

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most