Core Processes of Change
Rehabilitation refers to the process of reforming individuals who have erred in the past due to the choices they make, and the actions they omit. In criminology, rehabilitation involves influencing individuals to actively change their behavior form an undesirable one to a more acceptable conduct. The process of rehabilitation and probation could be lined to the core processes of change (motivation, self-efficacy, and empathy). Each of these three core processes of change (CPC) could be applied to meet different ends related to rehabilitation and probation practice.
Engaging in One-on-One Interventions
In the practice of rehabilitation and probation, more positive results have been realized through the singular engagement of probation officers with individuals, often one at a time. Schaefer and Williamson (2018) point out that one-on-one engagements with offenders tend to increase the positivity of outcomes realized. This is based on the fact that a good rapport is easier to create where personalized interactions are present. Thus, rehabilitation of individuals, or overseeing their probation would not just be easier on a one-on-one basis, but would be markedly more effective. Such engagement could be examined from the three core processes of change. For one, individualized interaction between probation officers and offenders is more likely to increase the motivation in the offender, to adopt positive behavior. Stinson and Clark (2017) assert that motivation could be a function of the encouragements that individuals receive from external sources. In this case, the probation officer would provide the push for offenders on probation and those being rehabilitated, to embrace positive changes in behavior. In essence, one-on-one interactions in rehabilitation and probation would lead to clarity of aspirations in the offenders to be better, and to do better.
Secondly, self-efficacy as a core process of change could be more pronounced in instances where there is a one-on-one interaction between probation officers and offenders on rehabilitation or probation. Cuevas et al. (2017) advance the view that self-efficacy is internal and arises from within an individual. However, instances in which individuals access an external stimulus, they may be more convinced of their own ability to perform certain actions – in this case, achieving positive behavior change. Basically, motivation of individuals on probation and those being rehabilitated would lead to the development of internal self belief in such persons. As a result, they would be more likely to aspire towards attainment of set goals. Probation officers tasked with rehabilitating offenders could impart in such subjects the confidence in the subjects’ own abilities to control their behaviors. Once the motivation in individuals is activated towards positive tendencies, the offenders would develop the persistence to stay on course, and later increase their intensity of involvement in such positive outcomes (Schaefer & Williamson, 2018: Cuevas et al., 2017). In this way, self-efficacy as a core process of change could be utilized to realize positive change of behavior among offenders and probates.
Finally, one on one engagement between probation officers and their subjects would lead to the development and persistence of empathy, which could then be tapped into to realize positive outcomes in offenders. Misso et al. (2019) observe that empathy allows individuals to frame their own actions or intentions within the frame of reference of others. That is, through the development of empathy, individuals can be conditioned to think not just of themselves but also of others. As a result, the actions of such persons would be tailored to minimize harm or disadvantage to others. In rehabilitation of offenders, one-on-one engagement would be useful in the creation of empathy in offenders, allowing them to view their actions from the perspectives of others. Consequently, such offenders could be swayed to behave in manners that enhance utility for the individual, as well as the society.
Managing Treatment Order – Drug Rehabilitation Requirement
The Drug Rehabilitation Requirement refers to a condition set up by the government through the Criminal Justice Act of 2003. Webster (2017) notes that the DRR was established with the aim of prescribing treatment of drug dependence in offenders under rehabilitation and those on probation. Often, the DRR is an option available to the courts of law, and can be an alternative to custodial sentences. In the exercise of this sentencing option, the duration and intensity of the treatment is customized to the needs of the offender (Webster, 2017: Vigliione et al., 2017). Often, this option allows for the restriction of the offenders’ liberties, as determined by the gravity of the offenses they committed. Overall, the DRR could be an effective tool for effectively rehabilitating offenders.
As an option, the Drug Rehabilitation Requirement is directly linked to the three core processes of change. First, the option can be used to increase the desire of an individual to undertake or to avoid a given course of action. Stinson and Clark (2017) observe that motivation is often the result of focusing on a given course of action, staying on such course, and increasing the effort involved in such persistence. From this perspective, motivation as a core process of change could be utilized to improve the outcomes of the DRR in rehabilitating offenders. Where offenders are aware of the options they have, being the custodial or the DRR sentence, they would be more likely to embrace positive behavior change. In effect, the DRR offers an alternative to custody by the state, and thus motivation can be used to help the offenders realize the desirability of the option. As a result, there would be an internal as well as external push for the offenders to embrace positive transformation of behavior.
DRR as an option to custodial sentences is only applicable where positive transformation is realized in offenders. Such transformation is realizable through shunning of drug abuse by the probates. Cuevas et al. (2017) note that offenders could be helped to develop the capacity of self-belief. Through motivation as a beginning for the process of change, individuals can be helped to develop the confidence to control their own behaviors. Consequently, the offenders would realize the need, and their own ability to shun drug use and to embrace positive transformation of behavior. Evidently, the DRR option would be more effective where self-efficacy is developed in offenders; allowing them to control their behavior towards more desirable ends.
Drug use could reduce the ability of individuals to control their thoughts, behaviors, and actions. In the absence of such influence, individuals would be able to make more reasoned out decisions. On this basis, it is important for probation officers to use DRR as a means of improving the ability of individual to view the world from others’ perspectives. Misso et al. (2019) front the argument that persons under no influence of drug would have clearer judgments. Because of this, it would be possible to dissuade such offenders from their previous behavior, which was exacerbated by drug use. Essentially, DRR could help improve the levels of empathy in offenders thus reducing the likelihood of their recidivism.
Working with Perpetrators of Domestic Violence
One of the most notable instances of violence is that between individuals within an household, be they intimate partners or just simply known to each other. Hamel (2019) notes that domestic violence is a behavioral trait that could be unlearnt by the perpetrators, and which should be eradicated. Through the application of the core processes of change, probation officers can achieve positive behavior results with offenders involved in perpetration of domestic violence. First, motivation could be used to dissuade perpetrators from committing acts of domestic violence. As Viglione et al. (2017) indicate, motivation involves providing individuals with incentive, or disincentives to maintain or abandon a given behavior or action, as the case may be. Upon this basis, probation officers could activate the desire within perpetrators of domestic violence to abandon such tendencies. Once motivated, the individuals would then be guided to maintain such desistance from violence against persons in their domestic sphere. The intensity of the desire to avoid such violence would then develop with time, and with sustained motivation.
In dealing with the perpetrators of domestic violence, probation officers could also embrace self efficacy as a core process of change. Self-efficacy connotes the internal self belief of a person as relates to behavior manifestation or goal attainment (Cuevas et al., 2017). By developing the self-efficacy of the perpetrators, such probation officers would in effect increase the ability of the perpetrators to exert self-control. Resultantly, the perpetrators would have control over the motivation they have for engaging in domestic violence, and their behavior as relates to such (Hamel, 2019: Tidmarsh, 2019). Further, such persons would also have control over the social environment they live in, and which may predispose them to domestic violence. In general, probation officers should work towards developing self-efficacy in perpetrators of domestic violence.
To perpetrate domestic violence, individuals need to have a very low sense of empathy. Seinfeld et al. (2018) define the trait as the ability to frame one’s experiences, behavior, and actions according to the perspective of another. In this way, the original party would be able to experience, what the second party does. For probation and corrections work, the development of empathy would be critical in deterring the recurrence of domestic violence. First, such end would result in the development, within perpetrators, of the ability to imagine the feeling that the victims of their violence experience. Thus development of empathy would allow the offenders to access the point of view of others, and thus reduce their likelihood of engaging in the crimes (Misso et al., 2019: Seinfeld et al., 2018). Overall, probation officers should tap into empathy as a way of deterring recurrence of domestic violence.
Conclusion
The three core processes of change could help in the rehabilitation and correction of offenders. Whereas motivation would create in offenders the desire to do better and to avoid their previous crimes, self-efficacy would give the offender the requisite control to make competitive judgements on their actions and omissions. Empathy on the other hand would allow them to frame their actions and behaviors according to others’ perspectives. Overall, the three core process of change could be applied to influence positive and desirable behavior change among offenders.
References
Cuevas, C., Wolff, K. T., & Baglivio, M. T. (2017). Self-Efficacy, Aspirations, and Residential Placement Outcomes: Why Belief in a Prosocial Self Matters. Journal of Criminal Justice, 52, 1-11. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047235217301903
Hamel, J. (2019). The Evolution of Evidence-Based Treatment for Domestic Violence Perpetrators. Intimate Partner Violence: New Perspectives in Research and Practice, 89-106.
Misso, D., Schweitzer, R. D., & Dimaggio, G. (2019). Metacognition: A Potential Mechanism of Change in the Psychotherapy of Perpetrators of Domestic Violence. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 29(3), 248. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-02763-001
Schaefer, L., & Williamson, H. (2018). Probation and Parole Officers’ Compliance with Case Management Tools: Professional Discretion and Override. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(14), 4565-4584. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0306624X18764851
Seinfeld, S., Arroyo-Palacios, J., Iruretagoyena, G., Hortensius, R., Zapata, L. E., Borland, D., … & Sanchez-Vives, M. V. (2018). Offenders become the Victim in Virtual Reality: Impact of Changing Perspective in Domestic Violence. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 1-11. Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-19987-7
Stinson, J. D., & Clark, M. D. (2017). Motivational Interviewing with Offenders: Engagement, Rehabilitation, and Reentry. Guilford Publications.
Tidmarsh, M. (2019). Transforming Rehabilitation: Probation Practice, Architecture and the Art of Distributions. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 1748895819848801. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1748895819848801
Viglione, J., Rudes, D. S., & Taxman, F. S. (2017). Probation Officer use of Client-Centered Communication Strategies in Adult Probation Settings. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 56(1), 38-60. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10509674.2016.1257534
Webster, R. (2017). Treatment Vs Punishment for Drug Addiction: Lessons from Austria, Poland and Spain. Drugs and Alcohol Today. Retrieved from https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/DAT-10-2015-0059/full/html