Treatment Paper: Effectiveness of Treatment of Gang
Member Offenders
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course
Instructor
Due Date
Treatment Paper: Effectiveness of Treatment of Gang Member Offenders
Gang members are groups of people associated with
a particular criminal organization known to have a high rate of engaging in
criminal activities, such as violent crimes, drug abuse, gun sales, and bank
robbery, compared to the non-gang members. According to the recent survey by
the National Gang Center (n.d.), activities of adolescent gangs have been
increasing rapidly for the past decade in the United States. Their data reveals
that about 30,000 gangs consist of over 800,000 members distributed in 3,000
jurisdictions across the country (National
Gang Center, n.d.). A larger group of
gangs is found within over 80% of the cities and 50% of the suburban counties; the
same data shows that they are present in 32% of small cities and rural counties
(National Gang Center, n.d.). Indeed, the data demonstrate that gang
members and their related activities have been rising compared to the past five
years. The problem is being felt in almost all corners of American society,
thus importance of treating this population. Hence, these facts raise the need
to relook into the effectiveness of measures that have been adopted in treating
gang member offenders. Consequently, varied scholarly sources discuss different
treatment approaches and related programs, such as cognitive transformations,
increasing opportunities and deterrence, and incarceration methods, designed to
address the gang-related issues.
Cognitive Transformations
Cognitive transformation approaches are
considered adequate since they seek to address cognitions. These
transformations are always critical since they enhance the capability of the
offender to adopt new and non-criminal behaviors. The proponents of the method
argue that not only the social conditions drive people to engage in criminal
behaviors (Farrouki & Mapson, 2007). For example, a survey on
most gang members indicates that they come from different social setups,
including poor urban and rich urban settings (National Gang Center, n.d.).
Contrary, a large number of people found in similar settings are not criminals
or members of any gang. Therefore, the method seeks to assert psychological
transformation rather than strictly confront behavioral change from a
sociological perspective.
The cognitive transformation treatment assumes
that offenders lack specific socio-cognitive skills that affect their reasoning
and self-understanding. Day et al. (2013) argue that offenders lack critical
social skills for identifying and solving their problems. Hence, the
intervention is to change the perspective of addressing their social challenges,
revealing the correlations between social and psychological backgrounds and
prevalence in different types of crimes or engagements with violent groups. The
transformative programs are delivered using small groups of participants, who
are practically encouraged to face their social problems. Thus, the ultimate
goal is altering their thinking in a manner that influences the law without
committing a crime.
The application of cognitive transformation
questions the theories that emphasize social factors as the primary cause of
gang-related offenses. Such theories argue that social connections and
traditions are the causes of criminal activities. However, the review of
different literary works on the causes of gang-related crimes by MacKenzie (2013)
establishes no explicit evidence to confirm such connections. Subsequently,
this review implies that treatment methods that seek to address social issues
such as employment creation, poverty eradication, and illiteracy reduction are
less effective (MacKenzie, 2013). Although on the same, MacKenzie (2013) and
Day et al. (2013) opine that the effectiveness of these methods can be enhanced
when integrated with methods that address cognitive problems. Therefore,
despite the correlation between employment, education, or marriage with a crime
reduction, it does not explain or give reasons that may influence individual
engagement in gang-related crimes.
Increasing Social Development Opportunities
Social programs advanced by the government and
charity organizations to create a healthy social environment have had
negligible impact on transforming offenders. For example, according to MacKenzie
(2013), the employment creation programs advanced by the government did not
significantly influence previous offenders’ return to crime, hence remain less
effective. The author argues that this failure is attributed to the lack of
preparation of people being given the opportunities (MacKenzie, 2013). The
social development approach assumes that environmental conditions are vital in
influencing the criminal behavior of individuals. They attempt to change
individuals’ social environment with the hope of building a sense of
criminality out of the person. Likewise, proponents of the method assert that
changing individual thoughts has little influence on the success o from crime
compared to their affiliation to social institution. Some scholars insist that
employment and marriage bonds foreshadow decision towards disengagement from
gang-related crimes. However, MacKenzie (2013) still questions whether marriage
with non-criminal spouses is sufficient to stop someone from engaging in
crimes. Hence, the views of most authors are that not every offender is ready
to take on responsibilities unless they are cognitively prepared, thus limiting
the effectiveness of the method.
Dissociating Gang Members
Dissociating from gang members is another method
utilized in the treatment of gang offenders. It involves encouraging
dissociation from a criminal group. However, Di Placido et al. (2006) opine
that this method endangers the affected members. It is even worse, especially
in a prison environment where it is difficult to avoid interacting with his
former gang members physically. Furthermore, it is considered a form of
betrayal when one renounces his membership in a gang. Hence, it may lead to
awful consequences, including threats to one life. This is primarily because
most gangs utilize fear to control their membership commitment. Although
dissociated members may be placed in separate facilities, the option is rarely
available in many facilities. Besides, there are notable successful cases of
dissociation (Wong et al., 2012). For instance, Di Placido et al. (2006) explain that about 5% of dissociated members were
successful. However, their success is attributed to the lower position of
influence they held in a gang. Thus, the efficacy of dissociation is yet to be
verified as an appropriate treatment of gang member offenders.
Isolation and Separation Treatment
Another treatment applied against gang members is
the isolation of gangs with their members. It is used to reduce violence among
different groups of gangs. However, the method has some negative consequences.
For instance, it led to seizure and control of prison when applied in a
Canadian prison (Wong et al., 2012). Hence, it has the potential of
strengthening the control ability of the gang that is left behind.
Nevertheless, there have been successes, mainly when the gang members are
segregated from the gang leaders.
Suppression of Gang Activities
The suppression of gang
activities is considered a regulation treatment that targets specific gang
members using methods such as a crackdown on the criminal activities of the
gangs. It is also perceived the most effective treatment approached from two
perspectives: targeted policing and pulling-lever strategies (Farrouki & Mapson, 2007). The targeted policing aims at implementing policies
while focusing on certain parts of the social setting. Patrol units, including
the specialized gang patrols, are utilized. The objective of the method is to
deter arresting offenders. However, the methods are sometimes less effective
since they attack the affected group itself. This strategy has the potential to
increase the level of delinquency in the group by creating an “us”
versus “them” social behavior (Farrouki & Mapson, 2007).
Ostensibly, the culture of the street gang renders the sustained attacks by
police counter-productive, which reinforces their interdependence for survival.
Therefore, the attack method is interpreted by gang members as a move
threatening their identity and ideologies. Therefore, as a counter to the
suppression treatment, gang activity prevention could be suitable for
eliminating ideological threats as a source of interdependence. Furthermore,
prevention treatment does not impair the integrity of the affected gangs, thus
more effective.
The second suppression
treatment involves implementing pulling-lever methods by explicitly utilizing
every available legal method to deter criminal activities of the gangs.
According to Farrouki and Mapson (2007), the method has shown positive
evaluation when applied in different cities. Compared to other treatment
methods, pulling-lever strategies have exhibited consistent characteristics in
the application. Therefore, most police departments across the cities have
applied the methods, allowing for comprehensive evaluation and approval.
However, the method only focuses on violent gangs, especially those using
sophisticated weapons in their activities. Thus, the effectiveness of the strategies
is questioned when it comes to handling other gang-related delinquencies.
Arresting and Incarceration
Arresting and incarceration treatment is an old
method that has been in existence for over 20 years. It is systematically
proven in its application as it has continued to yield valuable results.
Equally, the methods have been subjected to intense tests to assess their
effectiveness in deterring and preventing crimes. However, according to MacKenzie
(2013), these methods fail to treat criminogenic aspects in the affected gang
member. Similarly, Di Placido et al. (2006) explain that arrest and
incarceration of offenders fail to address the leading causes of gang
membership. Although probation programs implemented in prisons offers an avenue
for achieving such expectations, there are notable challenges such as negative
perception from other gang members. Thus, there is still a need for further
intensive evaluation to ascertain the most appropriate treatment methods for
handling gang member offenders.
Conclusion and Recommendations
An examination of other literature shows that
most methods that are thought to be effective in treating gang member offenders
are not as they seem. Most of these methods involve the application of punitive
treatment measures that have become obsolete with time. Studies done on these
methods were critical in underpinning these realities. Like the arguments by MacKenzie
(2013), the punitive methods, including suppression and prevention of criminal
activities, incarceration of offenders, and dissociation, have yielded more
harm to society than they were intended. Remarkably, they have contributed to
the re-emergence of intense and violent gangs. The literature claims that most
of these side effects are attributed to a lack of attention to cognitive
effects of gang membership and related criminal engagement. Thus, a large part
of the literature proposes integrating cognitive approaches in implementing
treatments for gang member offenders. Future developments also need to
re-evaluate application the traditional treatment methods concerning dynamics
in gang-related crimes.
References
Day,
A., Kozar, C., & Davey, L. (2013). Treatment approaches and offending
behavior programs: Some critical issues. Aggression and Violent Behavior,
18(6), 630-635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2013.07.019
Di
Placido, C., Simon, T. L., Witte, T. D., Gu, D., & Wong, S. C. P. (2006).
Treatment of gang members can reduce recidivism and institutional misconduct. Law
and Human Behavior, 30(1), 93-114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-006-9003-6
Farrouki,
L., & Mapson, A. V. (2007). The effectiveness of court-mandated treatment
on recidivism among juvenile offenders. Journal of Evidence-Based Social
Work,
4(1-2), 79-95, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J394v04n01_06
MacKenzie,
D. L. (2013). First do no harm: A look at correctional policies and programs
today. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 9(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-012-9167-7
National
Gang Center. (n.d.). National youth gang survey analysis: Gang-related
offenses. https://nationalgangcenter.ojp.gov/survey-analysis/gang-related-offenses
Wong,
J., Gravel, J., Bouchard, M., Morselli, C., & Descormiers, K. (2012). Effectiveness
of street gang control strategies: A systematic review and meta-analysis of
evaluation studies. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291164784_Effectiveness_of_street_gang_control_strategies_A_systematic_review_and_meta-analysis_of_evaluation_studies
