Treatment Paper: Effectiveness of Treatment of Gang Member Offenders

Posted: August 27th, 2021

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

Expert paper writers are just a few clicks away

Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.

Calculate the price of your order

You will get a personal manager and a discount.
We'll send you the first draft for approval by at
Total price:
$0.00