Healthcare within the prison system has been an ongoing debate for decades. In researching the pros and cons of healthcare within the prison system, it is interesting to note that the argument is not, so much against healthcare for those incarcerated, but rather the level of services given.
In considering whether inmates should, receive better medical care than law-abiding citizens is an uninformed question at best. No single person should receive “better” or “worse” than anyone else. To promote this violates every concept of the International Human Rights Law, to say nothing of the civil rights that are not, relinquished upon sentencing. With these issues on the scene, inmates must receive medical care that is equal to law-abiding citizens, as they are still “natural born citizens” with certain inalienable rights.
Secondly, when one individual accepts the legal position of “guardian” of, another person that is, in some way, unable to care for themselves, that guardian is required by law to provide care that is humane. Hence, inmates are wards of the state, and the state is required to provide the health care. To withhold medical care in this genre would be the same as a parent denying medical care to their child.
In rendering health care to inmates, many factors must be, considered. First, communicable diseases such as, HIV/AIDS, and Hepatitis. These, when go untreated in an over-crowded environment, exposes not only other inmates, but their caretakers as well, thus spreading the disease outside the confines of the institution. Although many people believe that inmates are getting better treatment for these diseases than law-abiding citizens, this simply is not true.
The medical profession is required by law to administer aid in the prevention of the spread of communicable diseases whether anyone can afford it or not. This fact was brought to my attention, at, a Life Skills Seminar I was giving for, the Adult Probation Department in, 2002, by a speaker with full-blown AIDS.In asking the question, “are inmates really getting better healthcare than law-abiding citizens”? I think not. It has been noted that, “While the diseases that affect prisoners are unique to this patient population in prevalence and disease severity, many class act law suits against state and federal prisons have brought to light the issue of medical neglect within prisons.
Understanding Prison Healthcare Inmates should receive the level of healthcare that ensures the safe health of other inmates, as well as those who work within the system. In regards to organ transplants, well, in my opinion, they should be at the bottom of the list.
REFERENCE:
Understanding Prison Healthcare, 2005. Retrieved from the World Wide Web October 31, 2008:
The U.S. Department of Justice has awarded almost $250 million in grants to support crime prevention efforts by communities and law enforcement agencies as part of a new initiative called Celebrate Safe Communities. The initiative is aimed at helping local communities organize safety-focused events during National Crime Prevention Month each October. You can read the full article by clicking here.
Thanks to torley for permission to use this Photo.
Despite our high tech and connected online world, you still can’t beat actually going in person to courts and records offices to verify and gain information on a subject. Many county courts are placing public information online. You can often look up court cases by numbers, names, etc. However, you won’t get the details of the case or a verifiable background check.
For example:
I had to interview a listed “witness” about a criminal case. While looking up his information on the internet, I saw that he’d been a convicted felon! So, before visiting his home, I decided to take a look at the details and went directly to the courthouse to read about it all. Good thing I did! He was a rapist and potentially violent. That wasn’t on the internet, and neither was the information that he was once again in the county jail awaiting trial on another felony!
Needless to say, I interviewed him with bars in between us!
Another example:
To help a friend, I assisted her to see if a lien was removed from her property. She had received a letter from the company stating that they had removed it. When I did the footwork, I verified that indeed they had not! Despite a court order, yet! I also was able to verify that they had utilized liens to cause people problems and often to seize their property in order to resell it at a large profit! The liens were all illegal and had no base in fact. So, she now has a case with many examples to be able to take them to court and sue in a class action!
Always do the footwork and do not always depend on online sources. Online databases are to be used as tools to point you in a direction in an investigation. They are not as up-to-date as records you may find in person!
In my opinion, it’s a combination of many factors. Defining the cause of deviant behaviour as being purely caused by one factor can open a huge can of worms.
If you follow the biological theory, the conclusion could result in defining areas where the higher crime rates are comprised of people with “faulty” genes. In that same school, genetic testing could be administered and the results of the findings could be used to label people as being predisposed to the possibilities of committing a crime. Therefore, the profiling of a group of people leads to the possibility of infringements on their rights–just to be safe.
Another theory may deal with the socio-economic reasons for crimes committed. Some people may feel that it’s out of necessity to do illegal acts. Granted, the harsher crimes of rape and murder are possibly out of the scope of comparison of a mugging because someone needed money. Still, a crime is a crime when discussing the generalities of “why?”
This same ideal could also be used to support the concept of people committing crimes because of the better living arrangements provided while incarcerated relative to the options they may have in the free world.
In any case, this is a topic that can be discussed and debated until the second coming. Again, this is all opinion with no references cited. Just my limited knowledge and ideas based on what I’ve read, heard, and seen.
*If you’re interested in participating in open discussions with your classmates on a variety of fascincating subjects. please visit the Ashworth Student Discussion Forum today!
A recent U.S. Court case and new research are focusing attention on “workplace bullying,” prompting some employers to take steps to curb aggressive behavior.
There has been a lot of news articles lately regarding bullies in the work place. There was a time in the not-too-distant past that the word bully conjured up memories of the school yard bully, or the neighborhood bully. Not so anymore. According to a recent 2007 survey of 1,000 U.S. Workers, 44% said they had worked for a boss they considered abusive. The survey was sponsored by the Employment Law Alliance, an association of 3,000 employment lawyers.
This year, two Canadian professors concluded bullying can take a more severe emotional and physical toll than sexual harassment, perhaps because companies provide greater support for victims of the latter. In a review of 110 studies spanning two decades, the researchers found that bullied employees were more likely than sexually harassed employees to quit, report physical and mental health problems, and be dissatisfied with their jobs.
Garry Mathiason, a senior partner at Littler Mendelson, a leading employment-law firm, says more corporate clients are raising the issue, motivated by legal questions, as well as concerns about the impact on productivity. Littler Mendelson featured bullying among its “breaking trends” in labor law at a conference for U.S. Employers this year.
Dr. Ruth and Dr. Gary Namie equate workplace bullying with Psychological Violence in work. Their site Workplace Bullying Institute is an in-depth resource for anyone who feels they are a victim of workplace bullying.
Roger Mezger reported in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on July 26, 2004 that, “Some of the most common bullying tactics, according to a 2000 survey, include making unreasonable demands, yelling and screaming, insulting or putting down a worker, taking credit for someone else’s work, blaming others for mistakes, casting doubt on the quality of another’s work, creating arbitrary rules and isolating a worker. You can read his entire article by clicking here.
Thanks to celinecelines for permission to use this Photo.
This is a very hot topic within the criminal justice field. As such, there is a lot of misconception about this defense. One of the most recent cases that has affected legislation is that of Andrea Yates.
What this case did for the state of Texas, known for its TOUGH ON CRIME and zero tolerance for murder, ESPECIALLY of children, was sign into legislation a bill concerning Postpartum Depression.
For a history of the insanity defense check out this terrific resource.
The major misconception about the insanity defense is that many people believe that just because a defendent has chosen this defense, they are going to get off. Actually this isn’t the case. According to the following statistics reported by FOX news in February 2002, the insanity defense works in less than 1% of all cases.
Given the insanity rules of McNaughton, Durham, should this be a defense at all in criminal prosecution?
It seems to be common knowledge that the United States has the highest rate of her population imprisoned. In fact, according to the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, one out of every 100 American’s are incarcerated. According to these same statistics, as of June 30, 2007, 2,299,116 prisoners were held in federal or state prisons or in local jails – an increase of 1.8% from year-end 2006, less than the average annual growth of 2.6% from 2000-2006. USDJ-BJS.
With the introduction of community programs, such as Restorative Justice on the scene, one would think that the transition back into one’s community would be a little less stressful. In spite of the fact that courts are working with communities to ease this transition, and thus reduce recidivism, through education, compensation, and building trust, why is recidivism on the rise?
In considering these communities, we realize that they are made up of individuals like you and me. Perhaps they have been a victim. Perhaps a family member or other close relative or dear friend was a victim. This would explain some of the reasons why a community is not willing to give offenders the benefit of the doubt. If an offender cannot get decent housing, or a decent paying job, he/she has a far greater chance of re-offending.
The creation of the Criminal Justice “Study Hall” forum was inspired by one of your fellow students: Betty Ray Mydland. The general concept behind this particular forum or “Study Hall” is to provide students in our various Criminal Justice programs with a dedicated “space” to openly discuss criminal justice program issues, lessons, topics, careers, questions, news, ideas, etc.
Thanks to Betty for this excellent recommendation. Well, the forum has been created. It’s up to our forum community to spread the word and get as many of your peers engaged as possible. I’m really looking forward to watching this Study Hall evolve.
If you haven’t registered for the Ashworth University Student Forum yet, take a minute to do so. It literally only takes a minute before you’re ready to join the discussion.
We encourage all of our Criminal Justice/Legal Studies students to begin participating in this new Study Hall today! Get involved with your student community!
When it comes to fighting what are alleged to be court sanctioned injustices carried out through wrongful convictions, The Innocence Project is without question the most influential, well organized, and successful criminal defense organization in the world. The majority of cases they take on involve crimes where DNA testing has put into question and sometimes completely invalidated the evidence used to convict someone of a violent crime. In many cases, they defend those who are facing serious hard time, often life imprisonment, and who don’t have the financial resources to even get their voices heard by the court. I must also stress that this group is not without its’ detractors. As you can imagine, many of the victims’ families are convinced that these men are guilty as charged. Even in the face of new DNA evidence that was not available at the time of the trial, some family members still and perhaps will always remain unconvinced.
From my perspective, one has to review these cases on a case by case basis—and refrain from generalizing about what this organization’s true contributions are to criminal justice and/or injustice. In this video, you’ll hear the story of Ronald Clarke, a man who spent 24 years in prison on a robbery, kidnapping, and rape conviction. Mr. Clarke was later exonerated due to The Innocence Project’s tireless work to have his conviction overturned on the basis of DNA evidence. It’s a touching story. We look forward to hearing your comments on the blog. Take care…
We assume that because we have a justice system, it is “systematic.” By that we mean, using the machine as a model, we expect that all parts work together toward a common result. We assume that we are all in agreement and meshing in a well-oiled way at all levels and functions of the system. We assume a consensus model, which we’ll examine below. Of course, a little observation quickly derails this concept. We know that there are pervasive conflicts in our way of doing justice. In fact, it was designed to be an adversary system, not a consensus system; therefore, we are often forced into conflict.
At the legislative end of the system, the great debates over drugs, guns, abortion, the death penalty, technology, security, and a host of other concerns, are routine. Budgets are fought over. Policies are implemented, defeated, and changed. At the judicial end, the same arguments rage throughout the highest courts and into the lowest. In the executive branch, where police and prosecution functions occur, the policies and decisions of the other branches of government can be resisted, disregarded, challenged, and otherwise put down. In corrections, errors in policies, prosecution, and enforcement become painfully apparent.
There are little empires to be protected and turfs to be safeguarded within our “system” of justice. There is a lack of cooperation, and often there is secrecy between agencies and subcomponents.
Remember, justice is not fairness. What we get out of the non-system is not only unfair at times, but may also be unjust. Errors are made, biases interfere with good judgment, and ideologies warp the outcome of trials and prosecutions. I don’t think the system is a disaster, but I do think we must strive for the best possible outcome based on the ideal.
Dr. David Struckoff, Ph.D.
Criminal Justice Instructor
Ashworth University School of Legal Studies
Subscribe to Feed
