Research Paper on Prison Abolition in Australia

Introduction

It is noteworthy that prison is an institution that is meant to protect society as well as rehabilitate offenders. However, some studies indicate that many prisons across the world fail to achieve their objectives and contribute to heightened risks of reoffending. Because of the above evidence, people have a divided mind on whether prisons should be abolished or not. The current paper provides various arguments for and against the abolishment of prisons, especially in Australia. First, the Australian prison system is a well-recognized Australian criminal justice scheme used to convict individuals who have done some crimes. It is important to understand that Australia prisons are mainly operated for the detention of both maximum, medium, as well as minimum-security prisoners convicted in federal not forgetting state courts. With that said, the paper offers reasons for and against the abolishment of prisons in Australia as well as a concluding remarking that gives the position of the paper.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Proponents of prison abolishment argue that this move plays a vital role in promoting change in the modern prison system. In spite of the fact that the Australian government continues to bring many people behind bars, most of the victims come from disadvantaged backgrounds. Scholars maintain that imprisonment act contributes to increased social as well as financial costs to the society. In particular, putting more individuals behind bars diverts resources form critical social infrastructures as well as cost-effective programs to address the cause of crime (Baldry, Carlton, & Cunneen, 2015). Prison abolitionists argue that the country at hand has numerous appropriate ways to mitigate crime in society than prison.

The Australian government is spending a considerable amount of financial resources on constructing prisons. For instance, the Victorian government announced a state budget of approximately $126 million to build nearly 244 prison beds. In fact, housing an individual in prison is expensive, and the government is spending about $90,000 per annum to ensure that inmates are catered for. Specifically, this is too high as compared to a net operating expenditure per community of around $7,000 per year. Statistics indicate that government spending on prisons is anticipated to increase in future (Kornhauser & Laster, 2014). Therefore, Australia should abolish the idea of prisons and embrace community corrections programs to change people's behaviors. In simple terms, the concept of prisons is a waste of financial resources and time because the whole process does not achieve the stipulated objectives.

Research indicates that prisons in Australia have failed to stop reoffending. Studies depict that approximately 55 percent of prisoners have been in prison before. Thus, this indicates that the correctional systems in Australia are not doing their proper job to ensure people change when out of prison. Some individuals enjoy being in prison because of their harsh background conditions. For example, a survey conducted in Victoria, Australia indicates that about 50 percent of inmates in prison experience serious background disadvantages, such as intellectual disability, alcohol challenges, and unemployment, to mention a few. In fact, prison is not a place for such people. Instead, they need community-based rehabilitation programs that will help them overcome their issues. Additionally, the government should create more job opportunities to reduce the rate crimes in communities.

Most prison abolitionists maintain that the act of imprisonment in Australia is ineffective in mitigating crime in the country. Evidence indicates that the number of prisoners in Victoria has increased over the years and the number is expected to increase in future. Therefore, it is clear that prisons have no influence on changing the way people behave in society. Because of this fact, many scholars suggest an electronic monitoring device to be used to correct people's behavior instead of prisons. The Australian political decision makers are persuaded to effect a shift from prison to electronic monitoring. Specifically, this innovative way of changing individuals' behavior in the community is associated with supporting Australian national identity (Kornhauser & Laster, 2014). In simple terms, prison abolitionists assert that comprehending the way social policy decisions are created takes part in sharpening the required scholarly agenda as well as demonstrating the way the convergence of an unparalleled set of non-rational cultural assumptions shapes underlying shifts in the punishment history of a certain community.

Proponents of prison abolishment argue that harsh prison sentences do not prevent crimes instead heightens reoffending. For example, the Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council maintained that long imprisonment hurts inmates. On the same note, the council argues that the act has an insignificant effect on the country's crime rate. In simple terms, prisons have a small deterrent impact; hence, increasing prison terms do not prevent the increase of crime rates in the country (Carlton & Russell, 2015). Despite the fact that supporters of imprisonment claim that prisons offer tough punishments that make inmates not to offend again, a research conducted by the council mentioned above depicts that imprisonment does not affect reoffending. Therefore, it is evident that exposing people to prison does not play a role in mitigating reoffending. In fact, some prison abolitionists argue that prison is an excellent environment that might affirm criminal learning. In simple terms, imprisonment is an inappropriate way to handle the fundamental causes of crime in society.

It is noteworthy that appropriate, better, as well as cheaper ways of reducing crime are available as compared to prison. In fact, putting an individual in prison stops him or her from committing crimes for the time he or she is in prison. Precisely, prison is considered harmful, blunt, as well as expensive. Some investigators assert that considerable increases in imprisonment contribute to modest mitigation in crime. It is unfortunate that prison may heighten the likelihood of individuals reoffending after completing their imprisonment period (Kornhauser & Laster, 2014). The Australian government should understand that putting many Australians in prison is not the appropriate and only way to create a safe community. The reason is that causes of criminal character differ from one individual to the other. For instance, different factors make people commit a crime, such as poverty, alcohol abuse, and unemployment. Thus, the government should look for excellent ways to solve the cause of crime committed in society.

Research indicates that the Australian government should use available alternatives to prison because they have many advantages. First, the options are less burdensome for the country's taxpayers. A recent study conducted in Australia indicates that between the years 2014 to 2015, the government spent approximately $15 billion on criminal justice (Mathiesen, 2017). It is unfortunate that the increase in prison numbers have experienced a rise in prison costs. Additionally, reports show that unnecessary incarceration has a downstream influence that lessens public safety as it heightens waste. The Australian prisons have a record of poor rehabilitation record. Simply put, prisons should be abolished and embrace alternative punishment approaches that are cost-effective.

The Australian government should embrace early intervention programs to reduce the number of crimes in societies. On the same note, the government should increase income equality among its citizens to reduce the crime rate. Also, offering stable housing as well as employment chances can play a vital role in mitigating reoffending. Prison abolitionists provide some alternatives to reduce crime rates in the community (Bartels, 2017). For instance, governmental and non-governmental organizations should provide community-based programs and offer abroad array of treatment and rehabilitation systems, which are cheaper as compared to prison. Precisely, prison abolitionists suggest some smart justice solutions such as handling fundamental aspects that lead to offending via heightened investment in employment, mental health, family support, and alcohol as well as drug programs. Additionally, extending court programs that address the offending causes are considered important than prisons. Lastly, Australia should promote useful options to prisons consisting of suspended sentences and community-based orders.

On the other hand, antagonists of prison abolition argue that prisons are essential vessels used by the Australian government to protect and change its citizens from crimes. Specifically, the government plays a vital role in ensuring its people are kept safe from violence, and this keeps them the confidence to work, live, as well as raise families in a conducive environment. In simple terms, the underlying part of protecting residents is incarceration. Some scholars argue that antisocial not forgetting dangerous criminals are supposed to be isolated to ensure that they do not harm others. Therefore, prisons are a key element of the Australian government to make sure that its people are kept safe. However, public safety is not secured only by incarceration (Casey, Day, & Reynolds, 2016). Investigators maintain that some small mistakes and crimes can be corrected through alternative punishments. Researchers assert that punishments, such as restitution orders, detention, as well as fines are preferred for nonviolent offenders. In particular, the aforementioned punishments play an integral part in reducing the risk of recidivism.

The opponents of prison abolition maintain that prisons in Australia play critical roles in therapeutic activities. For example, the invention of therapeutic prisons takes part in treating individuals with mental illness. Specifically, this introduces the idea of cooperative instead of prescriptive strategies of treatment. The use of these prisons helps inmates to undergo treatment processes that cater to their mental disorders. In particular, this treatment model utilizes multiple interventions, which target to enact lifestyle transformation in an inmate. The system enables a 24 hours treatment that heightens the opportunities for new learning as well as the reinforcement of positive behaviors and attitudes. Prisons play a critical role in social climate rehabilitation results (Harding, 2014). Specifically, social climates take part in influencing other important factors of life. For instance, some researchers maintain that prison staff perceives social climate as a vital aspect that makes inmates ready for the outside world. Precisely, prisons are paramount parts in ensuring a social climate in society.

Prisons are used to indicate that some forms of crime or characters are not tolerated. Additionally, prison is an important place that ensures people are protected against individuals who fuse the play by the available rules and regulations. It is evident that prisons are taking part in protecting society from various offenses committed by different individuals (Casey, Day, & Reynolds, 2016). On the same note, prisons offer some recreational and professional services such as carpentry. Apart from changing one's behavior, this place ensures that people get out of it with something important in their lives. In particular, this reduces the unemployment rates in Australia.

Prison abolition opponents agree that alternatives to prison are important only if they worked. For example, tagging, fines, and community sentencing are some of the options that do not work. Criminals can be fined and walk freely in the community. Ideally, th...