The United States and Canadian Correctional system

The get together States and Canadian punitive arrangingFrom a historical point of view, Great Britain had influenced the punitory organisation in the join States and Canada. During the Americas Colonial period, f either in-States was infra the British regularise and its penal system at once is influenced by efforts made during that time. While Canada is currently under the British rule and its penal system reflects their system. These two countries ar determined in fill proximity to each separate on the North American continent. In addition to sharing the same(p) continent and being influenced by the same country, these two countries punitive systems argon incompatible. Primary, the coupled States system puts to a greater extent than tenseness on penalisation through im prison ho part ho phthisis habitationment which peckers for its blue incarce ration set comp ard to other countries. Canada expresses more emphasis on remediateing, rehabilitation and rein tegration of the offenders into society. To explore the punitory system of these two countries, a comparative analysis will be conducted that will focus on the History, type of offenses or discourtesys, types of punitory system, correctional issues, and sentencing ersatz course of studys. Fin wholey, accommodations for resolving some of the close critical issues facing these two countries will be presented.HistoryEarly linked States Correctional agreementThe Unites States Correctional system had gone through many changes over the geezerhood. During the American Colonial time, execution was only routined for estimable offenses. Corporal penalty was often used as a form of punishment. Offenders who received material punishment received harsh treatment. For ex broad, a practice cal conduct ducking faeces was frequently used, in which offenders are valued on a direct and dunked into a pond until they al some drown. Another type of punishment was brand irons into someone skins, and was used for twain honest and petty offenses. accord to battler (1990) pillory, flogging, mutilations and banishment were used to assist deviant behavior. Those who were banished were sent to the western territories and the offenders were subjected to being killed by hostile Indians. jibe to prizewinning (1990) Corporal punishment stopped in 1682 when William Penn reformed the correctional system by censor it. He introduced beautifuls and created jails in each county in the soil of pappa. Unfortunately, when Penn died the State of Pennsylvania reverted back to the embodied punishment, which continued in every colony until the American Revolutionary war. Then from the seventeenth through ordinal century, jails and prisons in the fall in States were made with the intention to make profit off of the prisoners, which profited the wealthy people. submarine sandwich (1990) mentioned that private business interests were in control of North Carolina inmates, be energize the state and local anesthetic governments avoided the responsibility of racecourse prisons. This trend changed at the end of the civil contend when the inmate population increased jails and prison operation shifted from private opening move to state legislature operations. However, some states prison labors continued as a source of revenue and to a fault for semipolitical support. agree to Champion (1990) from 1790 to 1815, the national prison population increased tremendously causing prisoners to be released betimes from their sentences. Thus, federal official official district resolve granted prison administrators the right to archaeozoic release or discussion to cringe inmate populations. Champion (1990) mentioned, during the proto(prenominal) nineteenth century, probation and parole were established as a non-incarcerative st accountgy for managing offenders. In the 1930s, Probation started in selected jurisdictions. In the azoic 1820s parole was devoured and by 1944 parole was in all states.Early Canada Correctional placementDuring the seventeenth and eighteenth century, the death penalization was used against convicted serious offenders. gibe to Curt Griffiths and Simon Jones-Verdum (1990), transportation, banding, fines, trounce and confinement in stocks or pillory were forms of punishment for slight serious crimes. Banishment was first used in the Upper Region of Canada in 1802 and Transportation was used in 1838 until 1853. The offenders who were banished were transported from Canada to England, Australia, and Bermuda. The purpose of these punishments was to caused shame to the offenders. It was used as a general deterrent for the community. Forms of capital and corporal punishment were conducted in public. For example, the offenders dead bodies were displayed for the public to see general deterrent to crimes. Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994) storied that in the early period of Canada punishment was swift, severe and pro gressive and there were littleer uniformity in sentencing given by judges.According to Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994), during the 1600s and 1700s incarcerating inmates as a form of punishment was not widespread. For example, municipal jails and lock-ups facilities only held individuals who were awaiting trial, with the exception of a workhouse that was built in Nova Scotia, where prisoners were subjected to hard labor. In Nova Scotia, prisoners were exploited, and they had to pay for their meals and rents. According to Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994), failure to pay will takings in longer stay in Nova. The workhouse continued until the mid-1800 when it was determined to be unfit for make head mood habitation. Legislation was enacted to take in more workhouse in the late 1700s. However, many municipalities did not constructed such facilities because the warehouses were poor for habitation. This practice continues from the 1800s until the early twentieth century.In 1835, t he first penitentiary in Canada was in capital of Jamaica, Ontario. Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994) stated that the idea to build the penitentiary was influenced by social, political and economic changes in Canada. They celeb reckond that, in the last 1700s, increasing urbanisation and industrialization, increase in population, and increased social mobility had led to social control. Family disarrangement and community corruption was believed to cause crime. Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994) state that penitentiaries were build to provide the unavoidable cookery and discipline to individuals who had no family, church and community influences. Also the Kingston penitentiary was built because crime was seen as the consequence of immorality, intemperance, lack of phantasmal practice, and idleness (Griffiths and Jones-Verdum, 1994. p. 464). Also, criminals were seen as a threat to society. In 1840, the excessive use of corporal punishment in the Kingston Penitentiary led to an probe and a legislative action was implemented to reduce the use of corporal punishment in the Kingston Penitentiary. Giffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994) noted that the Penitentiary Act of 1868 led to the construction of several penitentiaries in the country.According to Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994), after World War II, vocational training, educational objects along with therapeutic techniques were introduced into the federal and provincial institutions. Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994) noted, in 1969, the Canadian Committee on Corrections concluded that reforming the offenders was more impressive than housing offenders in correctional institutions. However, in the 1980s, Canadian corrections returned to the punishment ground on reparation. Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994) noted that in the 1990s the federal train corrections are based on a mixture of program opportunities model and rehabilitation model. The opportunities model is based on the fact that offenders are respon sible for their behavior and not on personality dis locate or socio-economic conditions.The historical aspects of the America and Canada penal system are important for penology to understand why ones country is the way it is now. In the early period, based on the sincerity of the crime corporal punishment was used and as society got more civilized imprisonment was used to punish criminals for legitimate type of crime. Today, Canada defines crime and punishes criminal differently than the United States. The different types of crime and forms of punishment exercised by both countries will be explored.Type of CrimesUnited StatesIn U.S crimes are classified in two main categories misdemeanors and felonies. According to Champion (1990), misdemeanors are minor or petty offenses that carry little severe penalties. Misdemeanor offenses may result in fines and imprisonment for less than one year in a local jail. For example, financial statement, prostitution, shoplift and trespassing ar e consider misdemeanor offenses. Champion (1990) defined felonies offenses as major crimes that carry more severe penalty and may result in fines and/or incarceration for one or more years in a state or federal facility. For example, arson, murder, rape, burglary, robbery, vehicular stealth (Champion, 1990, p. 52) are consider felonies offenses. In the United States crimes are categorized as either violent or position crimes. Violent crimes are crimes that cause physical harm to other while property crimes are considered unprovocative crimes.CanadaAccording to Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994), there are three major categories of crime in Canada summary credence offenses, indictable offences and hybrid offenses-a combination of summary conviction and indictable offences. Summary convictions offenses are the least serious and carry the most lenient penalties ,while indictable offences are the most serious and carry the most severe penalties (Griffiths and Jones-Verdum, 1994, p. 2 16). Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994), mentioned that hybrid offenses lie somewhere between the two antecedently mention crimes. Summary convictions offenses may result in a fine of $2,000 and six months in jail. For example, committing indecent act, public disturbance, prostitution and thrust a motor vehicle without the owners fall under this category. permission. Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994) stated Indictable offences include, murder, treason, property crimes, possession of stolen goods, assault and come aliveual assault. According to Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994), these offenses may result in a two years to carriage imprisonment in a federal penitentiary or provincial jail (only if the offenses are less than two years). Also Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994) continued to noted, that Hybrid offenses include, theft, fraud under $1,000, driving under the influences and assaults (sexual assault and assaulting a police officer).Type of Corrections and Correctional IssuesUn ited StatesThe American correctional system is divided into the Local, State and federal official system. Each 50 states lay down different correctional organizations system. In fact, no state is required to follow any federal correctional system or plan, and as a result, a mixture of agencies and organizations is found (Champion, 1990 p.38) in every state. Each state, county and city maintains facilities to house offenders. Champion (1990) mentioned that State offenders are sentenced to state prisons, those who violated local criminal laws are sentenced to city or county jails, and federal offenders are sentenced to federal correctional institutions (penitentiaries, prison camps and detention centers). Champion (1990) also mentioned that recently, many federal prisons are used to housed state and federal offenders to help reduce overcrowding. On the national Level, the Department of Justice oversees all federal correctional agencies which include the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the U.S Parole Commission. in that location are different confinement facilities established to house prisoners, such as, minimum- credentials prisons, medium-security prisons, maximum-security prisons and Maxi-Maxi prisons. According to Champion (1990), minimum and medium security prisons account for 60 portion of all state and federal prisons in the United States. He further mentioned that the Federal Bureau of Prisons oversees numerous minimum security prisons and these prisons house low-risk, nonviolent first time offenders and prisoners who are on their way toward parole. He also mentioned that the medium security prisons house extremely violent and nonviolent offenders. In Medium prisons, visitation privileges, freedoms of movements and access to work program are restricted. Champion notes (1990) approximately 40 percent of U.S prisons are maximum-security facilities that housed escapers, violent crime recidivists and other high-risk offenders. Maxi-Maxi prisons housed th e worst type of offenders, especially offenders who tried to escape prisons.Regarding sentencing alternatives, legislators obtain established numerous talk terms punishments to control prison and jail overcrowding. According to Champion (1990), legislators established numerous forms of median(a) sanction programs. Champion (1990) noted that the types of arbitrate sanctions programs used in many US jurisdictions, include intense supervised probation, community-based corrections, house arrest and electronic observeing. Intensive supervised probation (ISP) involves make up or intensive visitation by probation officers on a periodic basis. The main purpose of community-based programs is to reintegrate probationers into their community. According to Champion (1990), Community-based programs include middle(a) houses, furlong monitoring facilities and halfway-in house. Champion (1990) electronic monitoring as confining offenders to their place of residences until their sentencing time is completed. According to Champion (1990), in the United States diversion program are available for minor offenses, such as reckless drivers and driver under the influences. He stated that diversion programs includes, psychological counseling for sex offenders, group therapy, vocational/educational training, probation, victim restitution and other programs. in that location are numerous issues facing Americas prisons, such as overcrowding, riots, prison design and control and racial variety among prisoners. Regarding overcrowding in the United States, in 1987 the state capacities were 105 to 120 percent over their capacity and the federal prison were 37 to 73 percent over its capacity (Champion 1994, p. 229). Today that ratio capacity percent amount has increased. According to Goldstone and Useem (2002), external pressures on prison administrations, such as charges in law or increase sentencing on inmates had influenced prison riots. They go on to state that, arbitrary rule, excess use of push by staff, loss of inmates services, extreme violence and lack of guard for inmates has led to riot in United States prisons. Another problem in prison is racial disparity. According to Anthony Doob and Julian Roberts (1997), in 1991, blacks account for 12% of the general population and 48% are incarcerated in prisons and jails in America. Finally, prison design and control are serious issues facing American prisons.CanadaThe Correctional Services of Canada and the National Parole Board Canada oversee all adult federal correctional agencies. The Provincial Correctional Services provides services for provincial areas in Canada. According to Giffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994), the Correctional Service of Canada action is organized into three trains national, regional, and institutional or district offices, and parole offices. The national level is determined in Ottawa. There are six regional headquarter located throughout different regions in Canada and there ar e responsible for overseeing the maximum, medium, and minimum security facilities, community correctional services and forest work camps. Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994) noted that the National Parole Board is an independent administrative agency with 36 full time members who review cases on inmates either component part life sentences and indeterminate sentences for dangerous offenders, grant full and day parole to federal inmates and to provincial inmates. Provincial Correctional Services provide services for offenders serving less than two years in prison. Provinces governments are responsible for detaining offenders introductory to their initial court appearances in temporary lock-ups facilities.Regarding sentencing alternatives, the Canadian Sentencing Commission mentions that sentencing guidelines should undertake a greater reliance upon community sanctions as opposed to the penalty of imprisonment (Griffiths and Jones-Verdum, 1994, p.363). The Correctional Service of Can ada and various provincial correctional agencies go numerous intermediate sanctions programs such as home confinement, Intensive probations supervision, electronic monitoring. Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994), there are also Community based-programs to assists inmates such as, vocational training programs, educational programs, chaplaincy and religious services, medical, dental and psychiatric services and occupational and vocational program.Griffiths and Jones-Verdum, (1994), suggested that Canada federal corrections are highly-Labor-Intensive due to gravid staff office who are responsible for supervising in custodial and non-custodial setting. As a result, escalating be of managing and supervising convicted offenders at the federal level (Griffiths and Jones-Verdum, 1994 p. 473) increase costs. Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994) noted that to housed inmates in maximum security institutions is very costly. They also mentioned, in 1994, to house an inmate in a federal facility i t cost on average $136 per day. Anthony Doob and Roberts Julian (1994), stated that aboriginal and black Canadians are overrepresented in the federal prison facilities. They noted that from 1993-94 aboriginals makeup 3.7 % of the population and 12 % was incarcerated in federal prisons and blacks make up 2% and accounted for 5% of those incarcerated in federal prisons. Overcrowding is a major issue in Canada Correctional System because it leads to escalating violence in its prisons.Comparative AnalysisThere are many differences and few similarities between Canada and United-States correctional system in terms of the types of correctional system and types of crimes. The critical issues facing the correctional system in the United States and Canada are very similar. For example, overcrowding, riots and racial disparities are critical issues both countries are facing today. These two countries correctional aspirations are different. The American correctional institutions finis is the rehabilitation of the offenders in prisons by providing training and developmental programs. However this goal was driven by other factors overcrowding, costs and economic crisis. According to Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994), correctional institutions focus on the reformation and the reintegration. Thus, Canada correctional system put more priority on institutional service programs to help offenders after they are released from prisons. For example, Canadian realized the federal prisoners literacy rate was low. In fact, in 1991 65% of inmate in federal correctional facilities had math and language skills below the level of grade eight (Griffiths and Jones-Verdum, 1994 p. 514) and an ABE prison education program were created to reduce the literacy rate.Historical capital punishment was used for serious crimes and corporal punishment was used for less serious crimes in Canada and in the United States. complaisant changes, such as, increase in population, prisons and jails lead to the constructions of penitentiaries and warehouses to housed prisoners in both countries. In the early twentieth century, both countries initiated probation and parole programs to deal with the overcrowding prison population. Currently, both countries have are many self correctment programs to help offenders and inmates to improve themselves in society.In both countries, sentences are based upon the level of seriousness of the crimes. The sentencing for less serious and most serious crimes in the United States and Canada varies. In Canada the minimum sentence for serious offenses is longer compared to the United States. And in the United States the minimum sentence for less serious offenses is longer compared to Canada. For certain serious offenses (murder) depending on the jurisdiction in the US, capital punishment is illegal as opposed to Canada were capital punishment is illegal. Banning capital punishment have increased the number of prisoners serving life sentences. According to Griffiths and Jones-Verdum (1994), in order to deal with the large numbers of people incarcerated, the government adopted the Canadian Sentencing Commission recommendation that sentencing guidelines should put great dependences on community sanction programs as opposed to imprisonment to reduce the prison population. Thus, correctional administrators and judges have push for the development of alternative sentencing programs to reduce the high incarceration rated.The type of correctional systems in the United States and Canada are different in terms of what governmental agency oversees the local and federal level prison system. In the United States, correctional facilities are divided into several levels federal, state, county and cities. In contract, Canada correctional facilities are divided two levels federal and provincial. In the United States all 50 states, including countries and cities set its own rules and regulations on how to run prisons. Griffiths and Jones-Verdum, (1 994) mentioned antecedent that Canada local jails and temporary lock-up facility (temporary housed people waiting for trail) are under the control of the provincial government. And, the Correctional Service of Canada (federal agency) oversees the national, all regional and institutional/district officers and operates 73 parole offices. Similarly, the Department of Justice (federal agency) oversees the all States, Federal and inmates on parole. However, Canadas Provincial Correctional Services (non-federal agency) shares responsible by providing parole and probation services to Canadians. This is due to the fact that the National Parole Board agency that is delegated to oversees all inmate on parole and probations are not located in some provincial regions. United States and Canada both have federal government agencies that oversee all maximum, minimum and medium security prisons.The introduction of intermediate sanction programs and division programs in the United States and Canad a was implemented for different reasons. Based on Champion (1994), the 1973 President Commission of Law Enforcement and arrangement of Justice created community-based program to reduce the prisons population in the US. In contrast, Griffiths and Jones-Verdum, (1994), stated, in 1993, Canada federal government passed a bill that resulted in the expansion of intermediate sanctions program that focuses on helping and keeping offenders out of prison. United States is more interested in punishing the offenders through imprisonment while Canada is more interested in providing alternatives efforts to confinement. Its one of the main reasons the United States incarceration rate in the United-States is the highest in the world. Both countries have seen the benefits of intermediate sanctions as a mean to rehabilitate and to reintegrate offenders into the community as a way to contain their costs and reduce their incarceration rate. Both countries used intermediate sanctions, such as intensiv e probation supervision (IPS), community-based programs, home confinement and electronic monitoring as a mean to reduce the incarceration rate and reintegrate offenders. However both countries cited that intermediate sanctions programs have resulted in output the net creating an increase numbers of offenders in the criminal justice system. A negative effect of increasing the numbers of intermediate sanctions programs is officials who are depute to monitor these offenders will not contribute much time and efforts rehabilitating every offenders. Nevertheless, these programs have contributed in some way or another in rehabilitate offenders.AccommodationsThere are accommodations the United States and Canada can apply for prisons overcrowding riots and high disparities among minorities. Regarding overcrowding solutions, both countries can implement front-door solutions (Champion, 1990, p.229), which recommends prosecutors and judges to have greater use of diversion program and communit y-based services for offenders. A second recommendation for overcrowding is back-door solutions (Champion, 1990, p.229), which involves granting prisoners early release or parole, furlough and administrative discharge. Currently, Canada is more into practicing the use of intermediate sanctions more than the United States. As a result, their incarceration population fall and contain their cost. In addition having private businesses investing in the running of prison facilities will reduce management cost.Bert Useem and Jack Goldstone (2002) note that prison riots are caused by state or national officials imposing peeled demands on prisons administrations, inadequate services provided to prisoners, prisoner abuse by security guards and more. Bert Useem and Jack Goldstone (2002) suggested that the Major Rudolph Giuliani solved prisons riots in New York by appointing Michael Jacobson and Bernad Devik who implement new reform actions. Such as, creating unity and coherence in form _or_ system of government among the warden and correction staff, increasing the safety of prisoners, curbing excessive use of force by staff and enforcing swift and effective responses to inmates provocations. Those New York Prison reform ideas can be implemented in every state in the US and Canada. Another solution for prison riots is to recommend staff to monitor prisoners who behave in prisons by granting those prisoners early release. single major issues that both countries face is racial disparity, for US it is African Americans and for Canada it is Blacks and Aboriginal Canadians. Solutions for racial disparity include changing mandatory sentencing law for certain offenses that tend to single out against minorities.ConclusionThe United-States believes that the rehabilitation of offenders is an ideal goal to be met in their correctional system, but in reality many offenders reenter into the criminal justice system. One reason cited earlier is that correctional officials do not ge t ample time dedicated to monitoring offenders rehabilitative progress because of heavy caseload and the large amount of people in alternative sentencing programs. In contrast, Canadas penal system puts more emphasis on the use of alternative sentences programs that focuses on treating the offender as opposed to imprisonment. Canada believes more in giving the offender an chance to better ones self. Thus, Canada has a mixture of opportunities and rehabilitation model. In fact, Canada sentencing commission and other governmental bodies have made it an effort to give offenders the need to arrive a productive member of society. Both countries implemented correctional programs and alternative sentencing programs to reduce overcrowding and costs. But the United States implemented those type of programs to reduce overcrowding and costs instead of rehabilitating the offenders..