NCJ Number
189674
Journal
Corrections Management Quarterly Volume: 5 Issue: 3 Dated: Summer 2001 Pages: 23-33
Editor(s)
Stephanie Neuben
Date Published
2001
Length
11 pages
Annotation
This study argued whether the time was right to revisit the processes and goals of prisoner reentry.
Abstract
Traditional mechanisms, such as the parole board, for managing reentry had been significantly weakened while a growing number of individuals were being released into the community after serving their prison terms. The study argued that the reentry process presented critical and unrecognized opportunities for the advancement of social skills, the role of reentry manager was undergoing major redefinition, and the judiciary should play a greater role in managing reentry. The emphasis was on the process of managing the transition from the status of imprisoned offender to that of released ex-offender. One important innovation discussed, suggesting a different opportunity and risk for managing reentry, was the drug treatment continuum. This continuum mixes treatment processes with criminal justice processes to achieve successful reentry by reducing drug use and recidivism. Reentry issues were seen as timely due to a new sentiment in the community corrections profession making community supervision a major contribution to public safety. There were also renovations on the restorative justice front where much of the innovation was taking place within the structure of the criminal justice system. There was an important purpose of this criminal sanction in reintegrating the offender into the community following his or her acceptance of personal responsibility for the harm done to both the victim and community. In addition, the role of reentry management was seen as best assigned to the sentencing judge. The judge’s duties should be expanded to create a “reentry court”. The judge oversees the entire sentence to make sure the goals are achieved. Other criminal justice agencies, police, corrections, parole, probation, and drug treatment are part of a team committed to achieving the goal. This judge-centered model borrows heavily from the drug court model. The entire reentry model presented may be difficult to embrace with so much invested in the current system. The reentry model would require a major overhaul of the existing system. References