highwaystar101 said:
I came across this report from the social exclusion unit (source) looking at Reducing re-offending by ex-prisoners in the UK. It recognises that re-offending is a large problem. However, it states that the best results for reducing re-offending is education.
"(We have)invested in prison education to double the number of educational qualifications achieved by prisoners by the end of next year. And this effort is starting to pay off. Crime is down 21 per cent since 1997. Reconviction rates for juveniles serving community sentences are down 14 per cent. But we know there is still a long way to go... ...People who have been in prison account for one in five of all crimes. Nearly three in five prisoners are re-convicted within two years of leaving prison. Offending by ex-prisoners costs society at least £11 billion a year. This all tells us we are failing to capitalise on the opportunity prison provides to stop people offending for good. We need to make sure that a prison sentence punishes the offender, but also provides the maximum opportunity for reducing the likelihood of re-offending."
In short, the UK prison system recognises the problem of re-offenders and they have tried to combat it by trying to achieve a balance between punishment and education. And offering education to prisoners has significantly reduced re-offending rates. The system isn't foolproof, but education does offer good results. |
I could be wrong but I suspect that if you looked deeper into recidivism based on certain crimes that you would find that education was highly effective with certain crimes and completely ineffective with others. People who’re committing (what could be called) an "Economic Crime" would probably be far less likely to re-commit a crime if they’re trained in a field which offers greater economic opportunity; while someone who has committed a violent or sexual crime will see little/no impact from this kind of training.
