PROFESSIONALISMIN JUVENILE CORRECTIONS: FAIRNESS AND BUREAUCRATIC LEGITIMACY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/mdwq3198Keywords:
juvenile offenders,, juvenile justice system, correctional staff,, , staff culture, aggressive behaviourAbstract
All individuals incarcerated in correctional facilities are entitled to humane and fair treatment. This study seeks to explain levels of professionalism in juvenile justice institutions. It further investigates how this dimension has an influence on aggressive behaviour among young offenders in the institutions. The study comprised a survey completed by 289 male and female young offenders, aged 12 to 21 years old, in 8 juvenile justice institutions in Malaysia. The professionalism subscale of the Measuring Quality of Prison Life (MQPL)and the scale version of Direct and Indirect Prisoner behaviour Checklist (DIPC-SCALEDr) were used in the study. The findings demonstrate that majority of young offenders reported moderate levels of four professionalism dimensions in the institutions. Furthermore, two dimensions of professionalism i.e. fairness and bureaucratic legitimacy are reported to significantly influence aggressive behaviour among young offenders. This study suggests that young offenders will be more likely to comply with authority’s decision and regulations when they are treated with fairness and respectful relationships. As the heart of correctional quality, staff play an important role tocreate positive correctional environment and to improve the quality of life among young offenders in the institutions.
Downloads
References
1. Aas, K. F. (2004). From narrative to database: technological change and penal culture. Punishment & Society, 6(4), 379-393.
2. Adams, K. (1992). Adjusting to prison life. In M. H. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
3. Allison, M. D. & Ireland, J. L. (2010). Staff and prisoner perceptions of physical and social environmental factors thought to be supportive of bullying: the role of bullying and fear of bullying. International Journal of Law & Psychiatry, 33(1), 43-51.
4. Badayai, A. R., Khairudin, R., Ismail, K. H., & Sulaiman, W. S. W. (2016). An exploratory study on symptoms of problem behaviours among juvenile offenders. Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia, 30(1), 69-79.
5. Beijersbergen, K. A., Dirkzwager, A. J., Eichelsheim, V. I., van der Laan, P. H., & Nieuwbeerta, P. (2015). Procedural justice, anger, and prisoners’ misconduct: a longitudinal study. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 42(2), 196-218.
6. Gangil J, Thunga G, Nagaich R. "Do Intellectual Property Rights and Data Exclusivity Encourage Innovation in the Pharmaceutical World?." Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy 1.2 (2010), 190-193. Print. doi:10.4103/0975-8453.75088
7. Bottoms, A. (2002). Morality, crime, compliance and public policy. In A. Bottoms & M. Tonry (Eds.), Ideology, crime and criminal justice: a symposium in honour of Sir Leon Radzinowicz. Cullompton, Devon: Willan Publishing.
8. Bottoms, A. E. (1999). Interpersonal violence and social order in prisons. Crime & Justice, 26, 205-281.
9. Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, shame, and reintegration. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10. Carrabine, E. (2005). Prison riots, social order and the problem of legitimacy. British Journal of Criminology, 45(6), 896-913.
11. Cartwright, D. (1950). Emotional dimensions of group life. In M. L. Raymert (Ed.), Feelings and emotions. New York: Mc-Graw-Hill.
12. Clemmer, D. (1940). The prison community. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
13. Crewe, B. (2009). The prisoner society: power, adaptation and social life in an English Prison. Oxford: OUP, Clarendon.
14. Crewe, B., Liebling, A., & Hulley, S. (2011). Staff culture, use of authority and prisoner quality of life in public and private sector prisons. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 44(1), 94-115.
15. Dilulio, J. D. (1994). Principled agents: the cultural bases of behaviour in a federal government bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 4(3), 277-318.
16. Goffman, E. (1961). On the characteristics of total institutions. In Symposium on preventive and social psychiatry. Washington, DC: Walter Reed Army Medical Centre.
17. Hassan, N., & Mokhtar, D. (2018). Bullying amongst Young People in Juvenile Rehabilitation Institutions. Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia, 32(3), 146-164.
18. Hepburn, J. R. (1985). The exercise of power in coercive organisations: a study of prison guards.
Criminology, 23(1), 145-164.
19. Ireland, J. L. (2007). Direct and Indirect Prisoner Behaviour Checklist—Scaled Version (DIPC-SCALED- r). Preston, UK: University of Central Lancashire.
20. Ireland, J. L. & Ireland, C. A. (2008). Intra-group aggression among prisoners: bullying intensity and exploration of victim-perpetrator mutuality. Aggressive Behavior, 34(1), 76-87
21. Ireland, J. L., Ireland, C. A., & Power, C. L. (2016). Attitudes towards prisoner-to- prisoner bullying and the association with prison environments: examining the components. Journal of Aggression, Conflict & Peace Research, 8(2), 124 – 136.
22. Jackson, J., Tyler, T. R., Bradford, B., Taylor, D., & Shiner, M. (2010). Legitimacy and procedural justice in prisons. Prison Service Journal, 191, 4–10.
23. Jacobs, J. B. (1977). Stateville: the penitentiary in mass society. London: University of Chicago Press.
24. Klatt, T., Hagl, S., Bergmann, M. C., & Baier, D. (2016). Violence in youth custody: risk factors of violent misconduct among inmates of German young offender institutions. European Journal of Criminology, 13(6), 727–743.
25. Lahm, K. F. (2009). Inmate assaults on prison staff a multilevel examination of an overlooked form of prison violence. The Prison Journal, 89(2), 131-150.
26. Laws of Malaysia. The Child Act 2001. Retrieved from, https://www.unicef.org/mala ysia/Child-Act- 2001.pdf
27. Liebling, A. (2000). Prison officers, policing and the use of discretion. Theoretical Criminology, 4(3), 333- 357.
28. Liebling, A. (2004). Prisons and their moral performance: a study of values, quality, and prison life.
Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
29. Liebling, A. (2008). Incentives and earned privileges revisited: fairness, discretion, and the quality of prison life. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology & Crime Prevention, 9(S1), 25-41.
30. Liebling, A., Hulley, S., & Crewe, B. (2012). Conceptualising and measuring the quality of prison life. In
D. Gadd, S. Karstedt, & S. F. Messner. The Sage of handbook criminology research methods. London: Sage.
31. Logan, C. H. (1993). Criminal justice performance measures for prisons. In Discussion papers from the BJS-Princeton project of performance measures for the criminal justice system. US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
32. Mariamdaran, S. D. & Ishak, N. A. (2012). Psychoanalysis approach on depression traits among young inmates. Southeast Asia Psychology Journal, 1, 81-87
33. Moon, B., & Maxwell, S. R. (2004). Assessing the correctional orientation of corrections officers in South Korea. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 48(6), 729-743.
34. Moos, R. H. (1975). Evaluating correctional and community settings. Oxford, England: Wiley- Interscience.
35. Murphy, K., & Tyler, T. (2008). Procedural justice and compliance behaviour: the mediating role of emotions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(4), 652- 668.
36. Phelps, M. S. (2011). Rehabilitation in the punitive era: the gap between rhetoric and reality in US prison programs. Law & Society Review, 45(1), 33-68.
37. Poggi, G. (2006). Authority. In B. S. Turner (Ed.), The Cambridge dictionary of sociology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
38. Reisig, M. D., & Mesko, G. (2009). Procedural justice, legitimacy, and prisoner misconduct. Psychology, Crime & Law, 15(1), 41-59.
39. Rhodes, L. A. (2001). Toward an anthropology of prisons. Annual Review of Anthropology, 30(1), 65-83.
40. Sekol, I. (2016). Bullying in adolescent residential care: the influence of the physical and social residential care environment. Child & Youth Care Forum, 45(3), 409- 431.
41. Sherman, L. W. (1993). Defiance, deterrence and irrelevance: a theory of the criminal sanction. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 30(4), 445-475.
42. Sim, J. (2007). An inconvenient criminological truth: pain, punishment and prison officers. In, J. Bennett,
B. Crewe & A. Wahidin (Eds.), Understanding Prison Staff. Cullompton, Devon: Willan Publishing.
43. Sparks, J. R. & Bottoms, A. E. (1995). Legitimacy and order in prisons. British Journal of Sociology, 46(1), 45-62.
44. Sparks, R. (1996). Penal ‘austerity’: the doctrine of less eligibility reborn?. In P. Francis & R. Matthews (Eds.), Prisons 2000: an international perspective on the current state and future of imprisonment. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
45. M. S. Neeharika, b. Jeevana jyothi (2015) chronotherapeutics: an optimizing approach to synchronize drug delivery with circadian rhythm. Journal of Critical Reviews, 2 (4), 31-40.
46. Stojkovic, S. (1986). Social bases of power and control mechanisms among correctional administrators in a prison organization. Journal of Criminal Justice, 14(2), 157-166.
47. SUHAKAM. (2009). Annual report of Human Rights Commission of Malaysia. Retrieved from, http://www.suhakam.org.my/wpcontent/uploads/2013/11 /annual-report2009.pdf
48. Sykes, G. M. (1958). The society of captives: a study of a maximum security prison. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
49. Sykes, G. M. & Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: a theory of delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 664-670.
50. Sykes, G. M. & Messinger, S. L. (1960). The inmate social system. In, R.A. Cloward (Ed.), Theoretical studies in social organization of the prison. New York: Social Science Research Council.
51. The UN Convention Right for Children (CRC).
52. Thomas, C. W. (1977). Theoretical perspectives on prisonization: a comparison of the importation and deprivation models. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 68(1), 135-145.
53. Toch, H. (1977). Living in prison: the ecology of survival. New York: Free Press.
54. Tyler, T. R. (2006). Restorative justice and procedural justice: dealing with rule breaking. Journal of Social Issues, 62(2), 307-326.
55. Tyler, T. R. (2006). Restorative justice and procedural justice: dealing with rule breaking. Journal of Social Issues, 62(2), 307-326.
56. Hamidi, Y., Toosi, Z., Tapak, L.An investigation the impact of strategic planning on organizational learning in medical sciences university(2018) International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, 10 (1), pp.330336.
57. Tyler, T. R. & Huo, Y. (2002). Trust in the law: encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts through. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
58. UNICEF. (2013). The Malaysian Juvenile Justice System: as study of mechanism for handling children in conflict with the law.
59. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
60. Shamim,F.M.&Vishwakarma,S. (2016). Exploiting the Motion Learning Paradigm for Recognizing Human Actions.Bonfring International Journal of Advances in Image Processing, 6(3), 11-16. doi:10.9756/BIJAIP.10465
61. Kumar,K.A.,Sadulla,S., & A. Surendar, (2018). Statistical Analysis of Reliable and Secure Transmission Gate based Arbiter Physical Unclonable Functions (PUFs).Journal of Computational Information Systems, 14(3), 62 - 69.
62. Pandey Vimal, R.L.Subjective experience aspect of consciousness part II: Integration of classical and quantum concepts for emergence hypothesis (2009) NeuroQuantology, 7 (3), pp. 411-434.
63. Mensky, M.B.Everett interpretation and quantum concept of consciousness (2013) NeuroQuantology, 11 (SUPPL. 1), pp. 85-96.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
