What is the point of prison?

[Deleted member 28]

A bit more intervention at the front end would be more useful right.?

Prevention better than cure and so on.

Schemes like 'Sure Start' such as @AuroraSaab mentioned, which the Tories closed down.

But that reached those from the most disadvantaged backgrounds, who might statistically be more likely to end up getting into trouble.

Plus better funded social services, 'care services' social housing, and education..

Oh yes, all those things , which can make a difference got less funding under Tory austerity measures.

It's the same old story, short termism to cut costs at the front end , ends up costing more in the end .

And not just financially.

in the sum of human misery, whether for victims of crime, or those ending up criminalised.

Lovely, and in the meantime people like my lad will keep them safely locked up so they can't do you any harm. Poor little Teddy bears that they are.

 

[mudsticks]

Lovely, and in the meantime people like my lad will keep them safely locked up so they can't do you any harm. Poor little Teddy bears they are.

Yes, yes, do spare us the usual

"I'm so very worldly and 'you lot' know nothing"

'schtick' shep dear..

If you wouldn't mind ..

My Nephew works In a unit for young offenders.

I've been the victim of crime myself.

I'm very interested in reducing the rate of offending, and tackling the causes at root.

Action after the fact, is not nearly so effective, causes more, not less misery, and is more costly overall to society, and the taxpayer.

So why not start early, with crime prevention through well thought out social policy.??

 

[Deleted member 28]

Yes, yes, do spare us the usual

"I'm so very worldly and 'you lot' know nothing"

'schtick' shep dear..

If you wouldn't mind ..

My Nephew works In a unit for young offenders.

I've been the victim of crime myself.

I'm very interested in reducing the rate of offending, and tackling the causes at root.

Action after the fact, is not nearly so effective, causes more, not less misery, and is more costly overall to society, and the taxpayer.

So why not start early, with crime prevention through well thought out social policy.??

Who said there's anything wrong with that?

What I don't understand is why everything is someone else's fault, usually the Tories, in your opinion?

There have been scumbags in the world forever and there always will be, get used to it.

 

[mudsticks]

Who said there's anything wrong with that?

What I don't understand is why everything is someone else's fault, usually the Tories, in your opinion?

There have been scumbags in the world forever and there always will be, get used to it.

Underfunding services, is the fault of the government, who else's fault can it be ?

 

[BoldonLad]

....
I'm very interested in reducing the rate of offending, and tackling the causes at root.

Action after the fact, is not nearly so effective, causes more, not less misery, and is more costly overall to society, and the taxpayer.

So why not start early, with crime prevention through well thought out social policy.??

A laudable aim, of course that should be part of moving forward.... but... will that "fix" the existing inmates?, and, potential inmates? If no, what do we do with them. If we assume we have potential criminals with ages (say) 15 and up, and, too late for "Sure Start", etc etc, we have a problem for the next 50+ years. Yes, OK, OK, it may be the fault of the Conservatives, but, having someone to blame (rightly or wrongly) does not make the problem disappear.

 

[LCpl Boiled Egg]

There have been scumbags in the world forever and there always will be, get used to it.

Yes, but there never used to be quite so many in the Cabinet.

 

[mudsticks]

A laudable aim, of course that should be part of moving forward.... but... will that "fix" the existing inmates?, and, potential inmates? If no, what do we do with them. If we assume we have potential criminals with ages (say) 15 and up, and, too late for "Sure Start", etc etc, we have a problem for the next 50+ years. Yes, OK, OK, it may be the fault of the Conservatives, but, having someone to blame (rightly or wrongly) does not make the problem disappear.

I don't know the precise methodology , I don't claim to be an expert

But I'm fairly sure that education, and rehabilitation, psychological and addiction help, and preparedness for living a life on the outside, outside of criminality has all been well studied, when it comes to reducing reoffending, on release.

 

[mudsticks]

Yes, but there never used to be quite so many in the Cabinet.

Come come, that's a bit like shootin fish in a barrel..

Although of course I do agree

 

[BoldonLad]

I don't know the precise methodology , I don't claim to be an expert

But I'm fairly sure that education, and rehabilitation, psychological and addiction help, and preparedness for living a life on the outside, outside of criminality has all been well studied, when it comes to reducing reoffending, on release.

I am sure it has, but, has it been shown to actually work, on a large scale?

 

[Archie_tect]

If you help people to take control of their lives by giving them the support they need.

Take for example a friend's son who didn't admit he was an alcoholic until he'd written off a car, lost his fifth job within 5 months and been assaulted by someone in the street while drunk and incapable. He'd tried AA but nothing was working for him, until he got a place at a charity hostel for people with drug and alcohol dependence, where they are secure and safe from outside influence and harm. It is extremely hard but it works.

The place is run by recovered addicts and has funding from several sources but not Government money. Without the support and dedication of those who have come through the programme , now including my friend's son, it wouldn't work.

It demonstrates to me that people just need a fresh start sometimes and that people can fall off the world but with help they can overcome even the most desperate hardships and situations. Under funded prisons without Probation and support services can't possibly achieve what is needed to prevent people being drawn back in to institutionalised crime and re-offending.

 

[mudsticks]

I am sure it has, but, has it been shown to actually work, on a large scale?

I believe so yes, from what I've read in the past, and how they do it in other countries such as the Scandilands.
I'd have to dredge up the papers.

But there's also the fact that many people really shouldn't be in prison in the first place.

Many are there for 'crimes' such as non payment of fines, and addiction related offences.

Not for hurting other people.

Often these people are mentally ill, or have been victims of of abuse themselves.

Locking them up (at great expense to all of us) doesn't stop all those behaviours being repeated.
If anything it's likely to perpetuate, and consolidate them.

Even just from a 'hard hearted' economic pov it makes no sense..

 

[BoldonLad]

If you help people to take control of their lives by giving them the support they need.

Take for example a friend's son who didn't admit he was an alcoholic until he'd written off a car, lost his fifth job within 5 months and been assaulted by someone in the street while drunk and incapable. He'd tried AA but nothing was working for him, until he got a place at a charity hostel for people with drug and alcohol dependence, where they are secure and safe from outside influence and harm. It is extremely hard but it works.

The place is run by recovered addicts and has funding from several sources but not Government money. Without the support and dedication of those who have come through the programme , now including my friend's son, it wouldn't work.

It demonstrates to me that people just need a fresh start sometimes and that people can fall off the world but with help they can overcome even the most desperate hardships and situations. Under funded prisons without Probation and support services can't possibly achieve what is needed to prevent people being drawn back in to institutionalised crime and re-offending.

A heart warming story, which, I am very pleased to hear.

I have a similar, experience, with not so successful an outcome. IMHO, there is more to it than funding.

 

[Archie_tect]

A heart warming story, which, I am very pleased to hear.

I have a similar, experience, with not so successful an outcome. IMHO, there is more to it than funding.

If the money isn't there services won't be supported or run effectively- it all starts with Governments funding social care... without adequate training, pay and resources you rely on people's charity which is no way to run a service.

 

[Rusty Nails]

I am sure it has, but, has it been shown to actually work, on a large scale?

Has it ever been done in this country.....on a large scale?

That takes money and resources, and the will. I am not sure the current government particularly, or any government really, has put all those in place. There is still an element that believes tough conditions will cure all the problems.

Other countries, e.g. Norway, seem to make it work:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-48885846
https://voxeu.org/article/incarceration-can-be-rehabilitative

There have been trials of different measures in parts of the UK, as this one in Durham"

"How should we treat convicted criminals? This is a matter of continuing public debate, and varies enormously across countries. Even within the so-called developed world, there are wide variations. The US, for example, imprisons more people per capita (over 700 per 100,000) than any other country in the world. At the other end of the spectrum are the Scandinavians. Norway, for example, has one of the lowest, at 66 per 100,000.

While the composition and severity of crime varies, the US and the Scandinavian model represent different philosophies. The US system focuses more on punishment, whereas the Scandinavian model emphasises rehabilitation: treatment and support aimed to help the offender become a law abiding member of society. This might include developing skills to improve employability or treating mental health problems, for example.

The UK falls somewhere in between these two models. Although it has the highest prison population per capita in western Europe, the country has experimented with initiatives aimed at diverting low level offenders away from prison.

One of the largest such schemes – Operation Checkpoint – is being run by Durham Constabulary. This “deferred prosecution scheme” allows offenders for certain types of relatively low harm offences (such as theft or criminal damage) to avoid prosecution if they participate in a programme that addresses their causes of offending – such as mental health issues or substance abuse. The first set of results from this programme, recently published, show a 15% reduction in reoffending rates when compared to similar offenders who did not participate.

A back of the envelope cost/benefit analysis suggests that the programme also represents good value for money, with the benefit to society from reduced re-offending estimated at £2 million against a cost of half a million for running the programme. Of course, while not every rehabilitation programme in the UK has been rigorously evaluated, these results are consistent with other evidence across England and Wales indicating that non-custodial alternatives can reduce crime."

Too often we in the UK are convinced that we know best, whereas in reality we suffer from the "not invented here" attitude to change. When prison does little to prevent re-offending just do the same again, but harder.

 

[BoldonLad]

If the money isn't there services won't be supported or run effectively- it all starts with Governments funding social care... without adequate training, pay and resources you rely on people's charity which is no way to run a service.

Well, that does not fit with my personal experience, but, I am unwilling to discuss personal stuff any further.