The_American_Prison_System

The American Prison System By Tanisha Eady February 11, 2009 The American Prison System The history of the American Prison System dates back to the 18th Century in England. The English Government had a system of punishment for the citizens that could not repay their debts. The debtors were either pardoned or punished. The American colonies followed the English way without very much change until the late sixteen hundreds when William Penn adopted “The Great Law” in which he introduced the idea that felons should pay restitution to the victims of their crimes instead of being tortured or mutilated. The Great Law also stated that the death penalty would be carried out for the crime of premeditated murder. After Penn’s death the path of Corrections took on another form and went from punishment to rehabilitation. This began the start of the Great Penitentiary Rival. The Great Penitentiary Rival involved the states of New York and Pennsylvania. Each state was determined to create a prison system that would work efficiently and still be cost efficient, so much that it became somewhat of a competition. New York was the winner. Each state used a confinement method by placing the offender in a cell by which he/she had no contact with anyone except for the guards or the clergy members. This method was so that the offenders could use the alone time to reflect on the wrong that they had done. The offenders also labored throughout the day to contend with idleness of their minds. The confinement method led to insanity and suicide among the incarcerated offenders. The state of New York kept the method but enhanced it by using the Auburn system that was developed by Warden Lynd. The Auburn system was not very much different from the confinement system except that the offenders ate and worked together with silence enforced by the guards. The Auburn system like many other methods had its pros such as a decrease in suicide and insanity among the inmates. The use of the Auburn system also made for the cheaper build for the prison institutions. It also very well had its cons. This system was an easy mark for corruption to come into play to exploit prison labor in the factories to make an under the table profit. By the late 1800s a group of reformist started a good behavior/ bad behavior program that allowed incarcerated offenders to be released early for good behavior or made to serve additional time for bad behavior. The Progressives also developed a program. The program was called the “Medical model.” This was a treatment program in which the offenders go through a variety of test and treatment programs to cure the cause of their criminal behavior. The Rivalry greatly impacts the American Prison system and has a great influence on its operations, even today. I can only account for the programs that are used in the Georgia Department of Corrections. The programs that are used in Georgia greatly resemble the methods that are described in the text and in the article provided by ProQuest. There is no way of knowing if given England’s violent punishment that the rate of crime there would differ than the United States but I am sure that it would. The United States is centered around a humane, non-violent approach to punishment that doesn’t seem to greatly deter crime and adds to the cost of confinement. The approach seems to fill up and over populate the prison systems causing a strain on accommodation. I feel that the only way to remedy this condition is by reducing prison sentences which would likely lead to an increase of crime or to utilize the good behavior/ bad behavior program more frequently. These conditions also bring into question whether or not to privatize these institutions. The difference between a publicly funded institution and privately funded institution is that the publicly funded institution is operated by the United States Department of Justice, a government agency and a privately funded institution is operated by businesses who hope to turn a profit. Many people argue that the privatizing of prisons would better benefit society which makes for a great topic of debate. Privatizing prisons can save money because the prisons can be run at a reduced rate, the prison staff is non-unionized and the goods/services can be bought at a discounted price. While this is makes great argument money wise, many fail to realize that privatizing prison institutions compromises security. Less staff is a design for lesser accountability and protection for the public as well as the inmates. I personally would rather spend more money than to spend less and leave my family open to danger. References Ann Marie Timmons, Monitor staff. (2004, October 29). Group: Prison plan isn't cost- effective. Concord Monitor. P.A01. Retrieved July 1, 2008, from ProQuest Central database. Criminal Justice in Action: The Core COPYRIGHT © 2006 Wadsworth, a division of Thomson Learning, Inc.