Academic literature on the topic 'Criminals Rehabilitation Victoria'

Aboriginal youth are overrepresented within Victoria’s criminal justice system (Cunneen, 2020). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth are diverse people with diverse needs: It is imperative to understand what those needs are and how they can be supported within Victoria’s youth justice centres. Research has identified that Aboriginal youth in Victoria’s justice system have higher rates of psychopathology (Shepherd et al., 2018), higher rates of recidivism (Cunneen, 2008), higher pre-custody rates and post-release rates of substance abuse (Joudo, 2008) and lower rates of rehabilitation (Thompson et al., 2014) than non-Indigenous counterparts. It is critical to explore how the Victorian youth justice system identifies and implements the provision of services that consider lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, queer, sistergirl and brotherboy (LGBTIQSB+) identities of Aboriginal youth in custody. This is because additional levels of systemic disadvantage, discrimination, stigma, and social exclusion that impact LGBTIQ+ youth specifically (Cunneen, Goldson, & Russell, 2016) as well as Aboriginal identity, further compound and jeopardize the social and emotional wellbeing of those embodying intersectional identities. This article will examine the services available to Aboriginal LGBTIQSB+ youth in the Victorian criminal justice system. Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander, Indigenous and First Nations People will be used interchangeably throughout this document.

AbstractIndividuals with severe mental illness have a significant risk of (anticipated) discrimination and (criminal) victimisation, which is not structurally and systematically addressed by mental health practitioners. The aim of this study was to develop and pilot an intervention which supports professionals to address victimisation and its consequences, in order to reinforce safe social participation and improve recovery. Following the rehabilitation and positive risk management literature, in addition to current practice, intervention components were developed in two focus groups and four subsequent expert meetings. The intervention was piloted in two outpatient teams before being finalised. The Victoria intervention includes positive risk management, focusing on clients’ narratives and strengths, and awareness of unsafe (home) environments: it comprises four steps: exploring issues with social participation, analysing victimisation experiences, clarifying the context of these experiences, and determining future steps, including victimisation-sensitive rehabilitation planning and optional trauma treatment. Future research should further test this intervention.

Objective: The aim of the present study was to describe characteristics and post-release outcomes of Victorian homicide offenders under the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 (and/or its forerunner legislation) released from forensic inpatient psychiatric care since the development of specialist forensic services. Method: A legal database identified subjects meeting inclusion criteria: hospitalized in forensic psychiatric care due to finding of mental impairment or unfitness to stand trial for homicide in Victoria; released into the community; and released between 1 January 1991 and 30 April 2002. Using clinical records, demographics, index offence, progress in hospital, diagnosis, psychosocial and criminological data were obtained. Outcomes (offending or readmission into secure care) were obtained from the clinical records. Results: Of the 25 subjects, 19 (76%) were male. Primary diagnoses on admission to forensic hospital care were schizophrenia, n = 16 (64%); other psychotic disorder, n = 5 (20%); depression, n = 3 (12%); and personality disorder, n = 1 (4%). Mean time in custodial supervision was 11 years and 2 months, less for those whose offence occurred after the development of forensic rehabilitation services. In the first 3 years after release, there was a single episode of criminal recidivism, representing a recidivism rate of 1 in 25 (4%) over 3 years. Twelve subjects (48%) were readmitted at some point in the 3 year follow up. Conclusion: There was a very low rate of recidivism after discharge, but readmissions to hospital were common. Lengths of custodial care were reduced after the introduction of forensic rehabilitation facilities. Recidivism is low when there are well-designed and implemented forensic community treatment programmes, consistent with other data suggesting a reciprocal relationship between safe community care and a low threshold for readmission to hospital, lessening re-offending at times of crisis. Further research should be directed at timing of release decisions, based on reducing identified risk factors to acceptable levels.

AbstractThis article makes three points about the death throes of convict transportation. First, the quarrel over transportation shows the double-edged nature of the moral critique of empire in the early Victorian era. Metropolitan criticism of transportation had its roots in the same effort to moralize the empire that was seen in the almost contemporaneous assault on slavery. But transportation was deemed too convenient a means of getting rid of criminals for Britons safely to do without it. Second, the Whig government of 1846–52 sought to save transportation by moralizing the convict before shipping him off. By this point, however, the moral objections to transportation in eastern Australia had become so strong as to make the plan untenable. Third, colonial opposition to transportation ultimately left the British government with no choice but to replace it with penal servitude at home, and the debate over crime and punishment that played out over the next decade revealed a waning of faith in convict rehabilitation that manifested itself in a harsher prison regime. In necessitating the rise of penal servitude, the end of transportation makes it clear that the empire mattered very much indeed to the reshaping of British penal policy in the mid-Victorian era.

One of the most striking changes in the penal culture of fin-de-siècle Europe was England's reform of adjudication and punishment. In this “de-moralization of criminality,” the system began to shed its punitive sentencing, which often saw minor offenders imprisoned with hard labor for weeks or months, to adopt a more moderate system of penalties. These concrete changes were intertwined with a broader shift in British criminological thinking from a “classical” view to a “positivist” one. The former held offending to be a rational, individual choice that required severe deterrents, whereas the latter saw criminality as a product of harsh economic and social conditions. This shift in dominant understandings of criminality prompted reformers, judicial officials, police, and policymakers to refocus on the causes of crime and its prevention, the offender as a subject, and the potential for treatment and rehabilitation through state intervention. A central practice of the resultant “penal-welfare complex” was supervised probation as a substitute for imprisonment. Scholars of penal reform have argued that the passage of the Probation of Offenders Act 1907, which initiated the professionalization of the probation service, was a key moment in this transition. With it, such arguments hold, England took a substantial step from having a discretionary, moralized criminal justice system toward having a standardized, bureaucratic one.

Over the last twenty years the Victorian justice system has recognized that incarceration of offenders alone does little to rehabilitate prisoners. As a result, it has implemented additional therapeutic programs within prisons. This has resulted in an influx of therapists into prisons and created two distinct work groups with no historical working culture. As research suggests that rehabilitation works best when officers and therapists are united, the present investigation involved interviews with twenty three therapists and twenty one prison officers. All participants have had experience with dedicated rehabilitation programs in Victorian prisons. A qualitative research approach was used, with a particular focus on the role that values, interests and power played in participants' encounters with conflict.