Correctional Sex Offender Programs Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Correctional Sex Offender Programs - Assignment ExampleAlthough the Washington section of Corrections class is not the first of its kind, it is the first of its kind that has exhibited such a high level of achievement and has carefully laid out the methods by which such successful results have been obtained. As such, it go forth be the purpose of this brief analysis to analyze the Washington Department of Corrections unique course in order to draw inference on the many ways in which offenders are conditioned and taught to release the negative risk factors that initially encouraged them to commit crime it the first place. Additionally, inference will be drawn based on whether or not the program should be implemented in other prison communities around the United States (McAlinden, 2007). It is interesting to note that the Washington Department of Corrections program (also known as the Monroe Program) emphasizes a system of acknowledgement and action that is not dissimilar from th at of plainly successful programs such as AA (Alcoholics Anonymous) and others (Leon, 2011). As a function of this, the first steps that are interpreted revolve around impressing upon the participating individual that they are responsible for their actions (Ward, 2003). Consequently, the program focuses on teaching the offenders to picture and target those patterns that initially spurred them to criminal behavior. Once this information has been learned and accepted (again acceptance of responsibility and a commitment to work to learn attitudes, thinking skills, behaviors that can assist this practice is a fundamental design of this re-orientation) the program then moves on to the familiar ground that many reformation programs cover that of teaching reinvigorated trades/crafts/or skills to the inmate (Osborn, 2007). Furthermore, the Monroe Program additionally offers group therapy sessions that are concentric around the topics of responsibility, patterns that work to rule the b ehavior, relapse prevention, community re-integration approaches, as well as skills and workforce training (Briggs, 2006). Likewise, with many offender rehabilitation programs, the Monroe Program does not offer its treatments wholesale to sex offenders (Marshall, 2006). There are a list of standard that must be met prior to the course being offered. These include the offender must have been convicted of a sex offense for his/her current or previous term of incarceration, the offender must agree to supervise themselves and their environment to detect changes indicating that their risk to reoffend is increasing, the offender must agree to work to develop the skills necessary to intervene, manager, and precipitate risky behavior, and the offender must volunteer of their own free will under the belief that the program can work to ameliorate their risk as it relates to committing crimes of a sexual nature (MacKenzie, 2006). However, the results of the program articulate for themselve s. Whereas many prison rehabilitation programs have low re-offense rates, currently and past literature on the slue has often indicated that sexual offenders are somehow beyond reclamation (Noles, 2008). This is however not what the results of Washington Department of Corrections Monroe Program exhibits. According to the Washington Depart