The Central Role Of Prison Guards In Criminal Justice Framework

The History of Prison Guards and Their Evolving Role

Discuss about the Prison Guards And Significant Changes In The Responsibilities.

One of the most common characteristic of prison is ‘total institution’ that is detached from the community, however, the environment and the circumstances under which the prison officers carry out their responsibilities cannot be considered as a separate unit instead a social and physical institution. Although the physical fences  restricts the prisoners from going pout and the outsiders from entering inside, but such fences do not safeguard the prison, its inmates or staffs from the flow of ideas regarding every phase of life which further includes proper conceptualization of prison officers in terms of terms of their work and conduct (Bartels and Boland 2016). The prison has become a high profile means of the law, order and policies of the government, which reflects set of expectations that is both contradictory and intricate where such intricacies is entrenched in the legal, polices as well. The essay entails a detailed description of the central role played by prison guards and significant changes in the responsibilities with the passing years with an objective to fortify the criminal justice framework to deter crimes.

The role of a prison guard or a prison officer was established within the prison institutional framework since the beginning of 20^th century and the concept of prison guard was recognized as person who shall be responsible for exercising control over the prison physically, thus, portraying the prison guard as a ‘masculine role’. This gender specific role was highly criticized ad led to the introduction of women in the role of prison officers (Jewkes, Crewe and Bennett 2016). With the formulation of penal policy in the mid 1950 attached more expectations to the role of a prison officer, which was actually the outcome of the international movement that caused drafting of the UN minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. It recognized the citizenship of the prisoner and emerged the concept of ‘human services’ during the 1980 and 1970s.

The additional role conferred upon the prisoner guard required them to respond to the opportunities or look for chances when they can assist the prisoners in reducing their pain. The prisoner guard has been conferred with the role of a provider of goods and services, which requires him to reduce the material deprivation of the inmates of the prisoners. The prisoner guard is also required to act as an advocate or referral agent to endow the inmates with an opportunity to exercise independence, though indirectly (Farley et al. 2015). The prison officer was also required to reduce the frustration of the prison inmates that arises due to the delay in the bureaucratic responses. The additional role that has been conferred upon the prison guards mandates them to deal with the psychological and emotional problems related to the institutional adjustment that must be made by the inmates, which may include institutional conflicts and concerns as well as family or personal issues.

Although the role of the prisoner guard as human rights officers is not very clear to the community as they carry out the responsibilities of a custodial officer, the concept of prison officer as a human service worker is said to have a persisting influence on the correctional administration. This is evident from the Correctional Services in Canada where its mission statement resembles a Human Services Model’.

The Additional Role of a Prison Guard in Providing Human Services

The other expectations that were attached to the role of a prison officer or prison guard included good verbal skills of persuasion, ability to make use of authority appropriately and to possess the ability to maintain all forms of limitations that already existed with the various departments, and between the prisoners, management and staffs (Grant and Jewkes 2015). The prison guards required to maintain moral courage, patience, professional orientation and empathy.

The evolution of prison guards into correctional officers reflects the evolution of ideas regarding the criminal justice framework within the society. The notion that society is responsible for rehabilitating criminal has led to the formulation of new obligations, responsibilities and have also led to an incline in training. It has also led to an incline in greater professionalization for those, in particular, who are responsible for maintaining and managing security at prisons and within other criminal justice facilities (Welsh 2018).

Until the mid-20^th century, no educational qualification was required for a person to be appointed as prisoner guard. Although at least a high school diploma is still a mandatory requirement for persons to be hired as prisoner guard, however, several states and cities gives more preference to a candidate possessing at least a college degree to be eligible for the post of a prison guard. To become eligible for the post of Federal correctional officers must have a bachelor degree as a mandatory requirement. Some universities and colleges even offer criminal justice programs that provide a certificate as a correctional officer or an associate degree. In the contemporary era, almost every jurisdiction requires the prison guards or custodial officers to undergo adequate training for which they are required to attend a training academy (Heseltine and Day 2017).

Prisons were perceived as dynamic work environment due to the changed perceptions of the responsibilities carried out by the prison guards and the changed expectations of prisons. This simple custodial role can be stated to have evolved into a more complex security role (Annison 2017). When the administrators undertook an interdisciplinary approach to corrections, psychiatrics and psychologists dealt with the treatment and the counseling as the prison guards were only responsible for the custodial and security duties. As mentioned above, that previously there was no need for a higher qualification to be appointed as a prisoner guard as their role was mainly identified as a masculine role to exercise control over the prisons. the prison guards were expected to be liable for delivering the safety of the community and ensuring that the inmates remain within the prison.

This responsibility of the prison guards remains the same in case of a custodial officer as well. This is because security is considered as the most crucial part of the criminal justice system as the prisons ensures the community that the offenders and criminals are placed aloof without causing any offence against the community (Glass 2016). Both the prison guards and the custodial officers ensures that the prison inmates remain within the prisons ensuring safety of the community. However, in the later decades, the penal environment underwent significant changes.

Expectations and Obligations Attached to the Role of Prison Guards

According to Scott (2017), the penal institutions became less severe and introduced inmate programs based on the rehabilitative philosophy. Further, the penitentiaries turned into ‘correctional institutions’ and the prison guards became ‘correctional officers’. The correctional officers were provided with increased payment and were also endowed with a professional work environment and enhanced organization and training within their respective career field. During 1990s, correctional facilities were subjected to criticisms on the ground of ineffectiveness of treatment, institutional overcrowding, bureaucratic ineptitude and many more. In its defense, the correctional facilities laid more emphasize on the element of professionalism. The correctional facilities further stated that they aim at serving the community and set out higher standards to correction.

Now, in regards to the assurance of safety that forms the primary role of the prison guards and correctional officers, the only difference that can be pointed is the enhancement of such security owing to technological advancement. This is because unlike in the earlier years when the physical competence of the prisoner guard was perceived to be sufficient for exercising control of the prison, the contemporary era is much more secured under the supervision of technology. Modern day technological equipments that have been developed for ensuring security of the prisons and its inmates include CCTV cameras, digital monitors, computer databases, etc. These technological equipments not only have made it easier for the prison guards or the custodial officers to exercise control over the prisons and its inmates but has also increased the level of confidence of people on the criminal justice system of the country (Gans 2016).

The use of the technological equipments to ensure security of the prison is not only advantageous for the authorities but also beneficial for the inmates as well. This is evident from the fact that the CCTV cameras will enable the prisoner guards and the custodial officers to ensure safety of the inmates by preventing them from committing suicides or engaging into unnecessary fights or violence inside the cells causing severe injury or death of the prison inmates (Findlay, Odgers and Yeo 2015).

In regards to the role played by the custodial officer or the prison guard as human service worker, the prison guards were conferred with the role without providing any training until the 20^th century. Nowadays, the custodial officers are required to undergo adequate training to ensure that they are capable of resolving issues and ease the pain that the prison inmates suffer and complaint about (Finlay and Kirchengast 2015). The prison guard or the custodial officer must be competent to motivate the inmates and guide them to lead a crime-free life. The concept of providing human services within the prison has been evolved based on the concept of rehabilitation of the criminals whereas earlier, the prison guards did not provide human rights services as they were concerned about deterring crimes and adopted the punitive approach.

The prison guards were only responsible to ensure that the prison inmates remain within the prisons so as to safeguard the community against them. On the other hand, the changes in the prison system has changed its perception to correctional facilities which has also changed the role of the prison guards and have evolved into correctional officers that purports to rehabilitate the criminals assisting them to go back to society and lead a normal life (Simester et al. 2016).

Training and Qualifications Required for Prison Guards

Another aspect of human service work is case management, which involves prison officers to perform responsible and important aspects of their role towards a small group of prisoners, thus, carrying out their responsibilities as case officers. Instead of involving social workers, professional services, counselors, drug counselors etc, the prison officers themselves acted as case officers. Carey and Del Medico (2015) states that although these changes were made to ensure rehabilitation of criminals, they were subjected to criticisms regarding expectation of cooperation from the prison inmates and argued that the case management procedure did not provide much motivation.

Further, Gallant, Sherry and Nicholson, (2015) asserted that the role of human service worker played by the prison guards or the custodial officers were likely to give rise to several ethical issues from the interactions taking place between the prison officers and the prisoners. There is likely a risk while conversing with the inmates and expressing concerns regarding the maintenance of appropriate professional relationship and inter-personal limitations. However, the changes in the prison system predominantly requires the prison guards or the custodial officer to undertaken the responsibilities of both a case manager and that of a security officer who also renders human services.

Another significant changes that has been made in the role of the prison officers is related to the change in the relationship between the prisoner guard and the prison inmates. Earlier, prior to the trainings that are provided to the correctional officers at present regarding rehabilitating the inmates, the prisoners were only perceived as offenders who must remain within the prisons and serve sentences. They must be prohibited from coming into any contact with community. However, since the past few decades, the correctional officers are trained to motivate the inmates and assist them to rehabilitate (Halsey and Deegan 2017). Previously, the role of prison guards was strictly restricted to ensure security of the prison inmates and the community. At present, the correctional officers are trained with the belief that their relationship was crucial to reunite the two roles.

It is essential to maintain a respectful relationship to assist the prison guards in performing their responsibilities. Further, Della Porta and Diani (2015) believes instead of treating the prison inmates unfairly, it would be helpful if they are treated fairly as this will amount to a significant step towards the improvement of the relationship between the prison guard and the prison inmates. However, Maxwell, Chmiel and Rogers (2015) argues that correctional officers usually build relationships with the prison inmates for who they are accountable, in Federal and State prison, especially where the prison inmates usually tend to reside for a longer period.

The primary duties of a custodial officers within the Australian Justice system, the correctional service sector plays a significant role in the supervising or managing the offenders in  both community-based corrections and prison custody. In the context of correctional service sector, the custodial officer shall play the role of correctional officer with the aim to lessen the risk of re-offence through programs and services that concentrates on successful reintegration. Villettaz, Gilliéron and Killias (2015) emphasizes on the significance of rehabilitative duties and responsibilities to be carried out by the custodial officers by acting as a community link in case community programs outside the prison facilities for the prisoners who have been recently released.

The Changing Perception of the Role of Prison Guards

Apart from carrying out the duties and responsibilities of a case manager, human service worker, the modern day prison system may require the custodial officers to assume the responsibility of medical carer that was traditionally attributed to the medical service providers during medical sickness of any prison inmates.  A custodial officer or prison guards are required to undertake such responsibilities as they have accessibility to the cells 24 hours a day and by treating the prison inmates fairly, a relationship of trust shall be built between them, which will mark the first step of rehabilitation (Stacey 2017).

In order to ensure that custodial officers effectively carry out their responsibilities, Australia has developed standard guideline for custodial officers. The guidelines set out the standards that must be complied with to ensure that they have successfully maintained the safety or gained confidence of the prisoners within the correctional system framework. The prisoners must be contained and managed in a secure, safe and humane manner (Becker 2017). The correctional officers are obligated to assume the responsibilities of engaging in activities that aims at bringing about a positive change in the behavior of the prison inmates with the objective to prepare them to participate and return to the community. It also  aims at ensuring that such positive activities like intervention programs, vocational education and work opportunities  to ensure they are not involved in re-offending.

From the above discussion, it can be inferred that the changes in correctional facilities shall continue to evolve and the custodial officers must assume the responsibilities that is necessary with the evolvement in the correctional facilities. The Australian government shall also attempt to develop policies and regulations that aim at reintegrating the connection between the roles played by the custodial officers and rehabilitation.

As discussed above, duties of custodial officers varies broadly by the institution and job assignment. On contrary to the early 20^th century, the duties of contemporary custodial officers are highly defined. Custodial officers are trained to abide by the detailed operating procedure standards while interacting with or observing the inmates. Another essential factor that has led to the fundamental changes in the role played by the custodial officers is technology (Knight 2017). Due to the advancement in technology, it has a considerable impact on the responsibilities of custodial officers.  The advancement in the communication and surveillance technology makes it easier for the custodial officers to supervise prisoners all the time.

Modern technology has also fortified the security of the prisons through metal detectors, increase security at prisons and other relevant criminal justice facilities. Further, as observed that the custodial officers in the present day is provided with trainings with the belief that instead of mistreating the prison inmates and preventing them from returning to the community, they should be treated fairly and encouraged to return to leading a criminal free life (Van De Steene and Knight 2017). The fundamental changes in the role of the prison guards emphasizes on the belief that prisoners should be provided with another chance to return to the society and lead a crime free life. With the introduction of the vocabulary educations and intervention programs, the prisoners will be motivated and with fair treatment on part of the prison guards, shall improve their relationship with such custodial officers. The assumption of various responsibilities by the prison guards or the custodial officers to ensure safety and security of the community as well as of the prisons, will not only safeguard the community against such offenders but will also assist the prisoners to rehabilitate leading to decline in re-offending rates.

References

Annison, J., 2017. Evidence-based Skills in Criminal Justice: International Research on Supporting Rehabilitation and Desistance. Policy Press.

Bartels, L. and Boland, J., 2016. Human Rights and Prison: A Case Study from the Australian Capital Territory.

Becker, P., 2017. Researching Crime and Criminals in the 19th Century. The Handbook of the History and Philosophy of Criminology, pp.32-47.

Carey, L.B. and Del Medico, L., 2014. Correctional services and prison chaplaincy in Australia: an exploratory study. Journal of religion and health, 53(6), pp.1786-1799.

Della Porta, D. and Diani, M., 2015. Introduction. In The oxford handbook of social movements.

Farley, H., Pike, A., Hopkins, S. and Byrne, C., 2015, September. Bringing digital literacies to students in prison: challenges and opportunities. In Proceedings of the 15th EPEA Training Conference (EPEA 2015). University of Southern Queensland.

Findlay, M., Odgers, S. and Yeo, S.M.H., 2015. Australian criminal justice. Oxford University Press.

Finlay, L. and Kirchengast, T., 2015. Criminal law in Australia. LexisNexis Butterworths.

Gallant, D., Sherry, E. and Nicholson, M., 2015. Recreation or rehabilitation? Managing sport for development programs with prison populations. Sport management review, 18(1), pp.45-56.

Gans, J., 2016. Modern criminal law of Australia. Cambridge University Press.

Glass, D., 2016. Investigation into the rehabilitation and reintegration of prisoners in Victoria. ADVANCING CORRECTIONS JOURNAL: EDITION# 1-2016, p.101.

Grant, E. and Jewkes, Y., 2015. Finally fit for purpose: the evolution of Australian prison architecture. The Prison Journal, 95(2), pp.223-243.

Halsey, M. and Deegan, S., 2017. In Search of Generativity in Prison Officer Work: Balancing Care and Control in Custodial Settings. The Prison Journal, 97(1), pp.52-78.

Heseltine, K. and Day, A., 2017. Rehabilitation Programmes in Australian Prisons. In The Palgrave Handbook of Australian and New Zealand Criminology, Crime and Justice (pp. 831-846). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Jewkes, Y., Crewe, B. and Bennett, J. eds., 2016. Handbook on prisons. Routledge.

Knight, V., 2017. Digitizing the prison: The light and dark future.

Maxwell, J.A., Chmiel, M. and Rogers, S.E., 2015. Designing integration in multimethod and mixed methods research. In The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry.

Ormerod, D., Laird, K., Smith, J.C. and Hogan, B., 2015. Smith and Hogan's criminal law. Oxford University Press, USA.

Scott, A., 2017. Crime prevention and prisoner rehabilitation in Australia: Lessons from Nordic nations. Alternative Law Journal, 42(2), pp.118-122.

Simester, A.P., Spencer, J.R., Stark, F., Sullivan, G.R. and Virgo, G.J., 2016. Simester and Sullivan's criminal law: theory and doctrine. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Stacey, C., 2017. Rehabilitation in the internet age: The Google-effect and the disclosure of criminal records. Probation Journal, 64(3), pp.269-275.

Van De Steene, S. and Knight, V., 2017. Digital transformation for prisons: Developing a needs-based strategy. Probation Journal, 64(3), pp.256-268.

Villettaz, P., Gilliéron, G. and Killias, M., 2015. The effects on re-offending of custodial vs. non-custodial sanctions: An updated systematic review of the state of knowledge. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 11(1).

Welsh, B., 2018. Costs and benefits of preventing crime. Routledge.

Wickramasekera, N., Wright, J., Elsey, H., Murray, J. and Tubeuf, S., 2015. Cost of crime: A systematic review. Journal of Criminal Justice, 43(3), pp.218-228.