Many differences exist between prisons, jails, and detention centers; differences also exist between managerial styles in federal, state, local, and private facilities. Compose an essay in which you address the following topics:
Many differences exist between prisons, jails, and detention centers; differences also exist between managerial styles in federal, state, local, and private facilities. Compose an essay in which you address the following topics:
Begin with an introduction that briefly describes the topic of your essay.
When every inmate reaches a prison with different crimes, backgrounds, and abilities, and different prisons offer distinct treatments, programs, and counseling, how can a state ensure an inmate is incarcerated in a facility with maximum efforts at rehabilitating and reducing recidivism?
How might social and cultural backgrounds affect grouping of prison populations?
How would a decentralized system differ from a centralized system in relation to managing workers in a state-run prison? Which process would be most effective in a private prison?
Your essay must demonstrate your social, cultural, and ethical awareness and integrate perspectives of diverse cultures and social and cultural practices.
Your essay must be at least two pages in length. A title page (if used) or any reference pages do not count toward the page requirement. You must use at least two peer-reviewed or academic sources to support your essay. All sources used must have APA style citations and references. APA formatting of the essay is otherwise not required.
Dr. Caldwell is Professor of Sociology in the University of Alabama. His “Case Analysis Method for the Personality Study of Offenders” was published in our Volume 45, Number 3 (September-October, 1954) Pp. 291 ff. He was State Director of Corrections in Wisconsin from 1939 to 1943, member of the Wisconsin Parole Board during the same period, and National Chairman of the Council on Youth Delinquency from July 1, 1943 to December 31, 1945. He is Counsel to Human Resources Research Institute for nation-wide studies of adult crime and juvenile delinquency.
Jointly with Laurence Foster he published Analysis of Social Problems in February, 1954.-EnrxoR.
The thesis upon which this paper is predicated may be briefly stated: A scientific knowledge of the dynamic interrelations existing between social groups within the prison community is indispensable to the prison administrator, warden, deputy warden, heads of prison departments, and other members of the prison staff.
The orderly operation of a prison or prison system depends primarily upon a sociological understanding of the nature of the functional relations existing between the formal personnel groups and the informal inmate groups within the prison community.’
These functional relationships may be comprised under the caption, “Group Dynamics.” In other words, this paper deals specifically with the dynamic relations existing between the informal social structure of the prison community and the formal social structure. The data for this paper are based upon investigations of prisons in five mid-western and southern states, and previous studies of the prison community.
1 Previous studies of the prison community: DONALD CLE1MMER, The Prison Community (Boston:
Christopher Publishing House, 1940); DONALD CT R, Leadership Phenomena in a Prison Community, JoUR. Cim. L. AND CmMNOL., Vol. 28, No. 6 (March-April, 1938), pp. 861-872; IDA ANN
HA nR, A Study of the Natural Groups within a Woman’s Correctional Institution, M.A. thesis
(Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama, 1951), pp. 66-182; HANs RmEER, Socialization in the Prison
Community, PRocRmNGs, American Prison Association, 1937 pp. 151-155; NoRMA S. HANER
AND EsS ASH, The Prisoner Community as a Social Group, AmsR. SOCIoL.
REv., Vol. 4, No. 3 (June, 1939), pp. 362-369; EwiN H. Sn RLAND AND DONALD R. CRESsEY, Principles of Criminology
(New York: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1955), pp. 497-512; Nonsss S. HAYNER AND ELIS AsH,
The Prison as a Community, AmER. SocioL Rxv., Vol. 5, No. 4 (August, 1940), pp. 577-583; PAns
B. Foss A, Guide Theory for the Study of Informal Inmate Relations, SouTnwEsER. SOC. Sc.
QuART., (December, 1953), pp. 34-46; S. KiRsoN WEINBERG, Aspects of the Prison’s Social Structure AmER. JouR. oF SocmL, Vol. 47, No. 5 (March, 1942), pp. 717-726; CLARecE ScHRAG, Leadership among Prison Inmate.;- AmER. SOcIOL. REv., Vol. 19, No. 1 (February, 1954), pp. 37-42; VERNON
Fox, The Efetc of Counseling on Ad-uvtments in Prison, Soc. FoRcEs, Vol. 32, No. 3 (March, 1954),
pp. 285-289; Nonsss S. HAYNER, Washing’on S’at, Cor-:.nonal Institutions as Communities, Soc.
FoRcEs, Vol. 21, No. 3 (March, 1943), pp. 316-322; DONALD R. TAFr, The Gronp and ComnMzunity
Organization Approach to Prison Administration, PROCEEDINGS, American Prison Association,
1942, pp. 275-284; IDA ANN HARPER, The Role of the ‘Fringer’ in a State Prison for Women, Soc.
FORcEs, Vol. 31, No. 1 (October, 1952), pp. 53-60.