Throughout the existing literature, rehabilitation and rehabilitative services are broadly defined. It is important to have a clear definition of rehabilitation and rehabilitative services to best study these topics. To some, rehabilitation can be punitive, as they believe the punishment itself has a rehabilitative effect, helping offenders to change their ways (Forsberg and Douglas 2022). However, others feel that though rehabilitation is part of the punitive process, it involves more resources (Forsberg and Douglas 2022). Some literature sees rehabilitation and recovery as synonymous and emphasizes the use of others in the rehabilitative process (Veysey et al. 2011).
Information for this graphic came from Forsberg and Douglas 2022.
This study sees rehabilitation as the process of reducing inequities and labels that may lead an individual to commit a crime. These inequities will be more clearly laid out in a later section. Therefore, the definition utilized in this project comprises pieces of all five of Forsberg and Douglas’s (2022) types of rehabilitation.
One of the general programs offered by many facilities is based on education. Dewey and Prohaska (2021) conducted a study that focused on offender and educator relationships, finding that there is a more positive culture found in educational units that could be applied throughout facilities, as a positive prison culture has potential benefits for all inmates. Further, the completion of educational programs could allow incarcerated individuals to take on more responsibilities, and become more qualified for life outside of the facility (Dewey and Prohaska 2021). Beyond just educational programs, some facilities offer more specialized instruction through vocational training (Forsberg and Douglas 2022). Vocational training and education allow incarcerated individuals to leave the correctional more qualified for employment than when they entered. Most of the literature that discusses rehabilitative programs mentions educational and vocational programs as they are considered the most typical and widely available (Phelps 2011).
CDCR Pleasant Valley State Prison graduation ceremony by California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Public Domain.
Therapy and various treatment programs are also common in correctional facilities. Veysey et al. (2011) argue that correctional facility programming is not much different than medical attention, as the premise of many programs is to target a “symptom” and then aim to treat it. For many incarcerated individuals, treatments often include therapies for mental illnesses and substance abuse (Veysey et al. 2011; Taylor 2021; Dewey and Prohaska 2021; Frosberg and Douglas 2022). Giordano (2014) conducted research on public beliefs about drug addiction and drug treatment programs for incarcerated individuals. The findings of this study showed that the general public was in support of drug treatment for those who have an addiction, as long as it was supervised through the courts for those who have drug offenses.
Rehabilitative treatments provided by correctional institutions often go beyond education, job training, and treatment. For many programs, the goal is to provide incarcerated individuals with the tools to succeed after reentering society (Taylor 2021). Some programs that aim to accomplish this involve a mentor/mentee relationship between an incarcerated individual and those within the social justice system. Taylor (2021) found that mentor programs were beneficial in connecting offenders to social programs, and in some cases helped the offender attend check-ins with the court system. For the purpose of this study, the above-mentioned programs will be considered as rehabilitative as well as programs that are focused on incarcerated individuals’ ability to reflect, focus on self-improvement, or help them prepare for reentry into society.