The effectiveness of prisons has long been a topic of debate in the criminal justice system and society as a whole. On one hand, prisons serve the purposes of punishment and removing offenders from society. On the other hand, high rates of recidivism raise questions about whether incarceration is rehabilitating criminals or further entrenching them in a cycle of crime. This article will examine evidence on both sides of this issue, looking at recidivism data, pros and cons of incarceration, and research on rehabilitation programs in prison.

Recidivism Rates Among Ex-Prisoners

One of the biggest measures used to evaluate the success of prisons is recidivism, or the rate at which released prisoners commit new crimes. High recidivism rates cast doubt on the effectiveness of incarceration as a rehabilitative strategy. According to the National Institute of Justice, within 3 years of release 68% of ex-prisoners are rearrested, 43% are re-convicted of a new crime, and 52% return to prison for either a new crime or parole violation.1 Other research puts the 5-year recidivism rate around 76%.2

These high rates of re-offending suggest that for many prisoners, incarceration does not provide effective rehabilitation or deterrence from future criminal behavior. The experience of being imprisoned reinforces criminal tendencies rather than reforming them. Critics argue that prisons themselves are “schools of crime” where inmates learn better criminal skills from each other and become socialized into a deviant subculture.3 Being labelled as a criminal also makes it harder for ex-prisoners to successfully re-integrate into society and gain legal employment.

Pros of Incarceration

While the recidivism data presents a bleak picture, there are aspects of incarceration that provide benefits to society:

Incapacitation

Imprisoning criminals removes them from the general population and prevents them from committing further crimes, at least for a time. Each criminal locked up is one less criminal able to victimize others in the community. This temporary incapacitation effect provides immediate relief to neighborhoods plagued by high crime rates.

Deterrence

The threat of prison time deters some would-be offenders from committing crimes. Certainty and severity of punishment both correlate with reduced criminal behavior, although the former has a stronger effect.4 While incarceration’s deterrent effect on serious crime is modest, it likely prevents many smaller offenses like petty theft and vandalism.

Retribution

Society demands that criminal acts be met with proportionate punishment, and prison sentences are seen as the appropriate retribution in many cases. Justice requires that offenders “pay” for the harm they’ve caused. Victims of crime and the general public derive some satisfaction from seeing criminals locked away.

Cons of Incarceration

Despite the benefits outlined above, incarceration comes with significant drawbacks:

High Cost

It is expensive to house inmates and run prisons with staff, health care, amenities and security. The average cost to incarcerate one federal prisoner in FY 2020 was $37,449 per year.5 With over 1.8 million people behind bars nationwide, prisons impose a huge financial burden on government budgets, crowding out resources for other priorities like education and infrastructure.

Lost Wages & Tax Revenue

Locking up millions of working-age adults removes them from the labor force, costing the economy their productivity and wages. If ex-prisoners struggle to find jobs after release, that represents more lost economic opportunity. And since most prisoners come from lower-income demographics, incarceration likely hinders economic mobility.

Mental Health & Abuse

Prison environments can be dangerous places where both guards and inmates perpetrate physical and sexual abuse. Solitary confinement as a disciplinary measure can also worsen inmates’ mental health. Mentally ill prisoners are disciplined when they act out, rather than treated.

Disruption of Families & Communities

Imprisonment breaks up families, leaves children without parents, and concentrates the effects of incarceration on certain neighborhoods. About half of inmates have minor children.6 These adverse effects on families and communities ripple through generations.

Do Rehabilitation Programs Work?

Given the downsides of imprisonment summarized above, are there better alternatives for rehabilitating offenders? Many prisons offer programs like counseling, education, vocational training, drug treatment or faith-based initiatives. But research on the effectiveness of these programs is mixed.

Some studies have found modest reductions in recidivism from educational programs. Inmates who participate in academic or vocational education are up to 43% less likely to reoffend.7 Cognitive behavioral therapy programs also show evidence of effectiveness in some cases, reducing recidivism by up to 30%.8

However other analyses find no significant difference between program participants and non-participants. Much depends on the quality and intensity of implementation. Overall, rehabilitation programs in prison have not reliably reduced recidivism rates across state and federal prisons.9 But opportunities for reform do exist. Potential options include:

• Focus resources on the most effective programs while cutting ineffective ones
• Make programming available earlier in sentences so inmates can practice skills before release
• Strengthen educational offerings to improve employment prospects
• Create better linkages to community resources and supervision upon release

Conclusion

In summary, while prisons incapacitate criminals and provide punishment, they appear less successful at deterring crime and rehabilitating most prisoners. Recidivism rates have remained stubbornly high even as programming has expanded. Prison privatization has also raised concerns about perverse incentives.10 Still, viable alternatives to imprisonment are lacking for serious and repeat offenders.

Going forward, policymakers could shift the focus toward minimizing incarceration time and expanding evidence-based rehabilitative programming. Community supervision, fines, restitution and treatment could be used more for non-violent crimes. Prisons will likely remain necessary but should be just one tool among many in the criminal justice system.

Frequently Asked Questions

Are prisons meant to punish or rehabilitate?

Prisons are intended to serve dual purposes – punishment and rehabilitation. Incapacitation provides punishment by depriving inmates of their liberty. Prisons also aim to provide rehabilitation through educational, vocational and therapeutic programming. However, high recidivism rates raise doubts about how successfully most prisons rehabilitate inmates.

Do private prisons save taxpayer money?

Private prisons market themselves as a cheaper option than state-run facilities. But research shows little difference in costs, as the same fixed expenses exist regardless of who operates a prison. Some studies even find that private prisons have higher rates of violence and recidivism, undermining their value. Profits may also create perverse incentives against rehabilitation.

Are death penalty sentences an effective deterrent to serious crimes?

Studies show little evidence that the death penalty deters would-be murderers more effectively than life imprisonment. States which abolish the death penalty do not see corresponding increases in homicide. Potential murders are often committed in moments of passion without considering punishments. The rarity of executions and their long delays from sentencing also weaken any deterrent effect.

Should prisons focus more on punishment or rehabilitation?

Experts debate the right balance between punishment and rehabilitation in prisons. A retributive model prioritizes punishment through lengthy sentences. A rehabilitation model would provide more programming and shorter sentences. But neither model has dramatically lowered recidivism rates nationally. Prisons likely need to incapacitate serious offenders, while also expanding proven rehabilitation programs for willing participants.

Are private prisons more cost-effective than public prisons?

Research shows little difference in operational costs between private and public prisons. Private facilities often cherry-pick the cheapest inmates to house. Some studies even find private prisons have higher rates of violence and recidivism, undermining their value. Profits may create perverse incentives against rehabilitation. Cost savings are unlikely to come from privatization alone without broader reforms.