Improving Deaf Inmates’ Accommodations Introduction and College Superior Papers Dissertation Writing: University Superior Essays Online Coursework Writers – Outline
Introduction
Challenges are experienced in the course of handling deaf inmates by correctional officers and thus there indeed to develop effective policies to improve their care and handling. The facts that the deaf cannot hear and cannot have conversations with feral inmates and correctional officer to enhance their efficient rehabilitation process. Additionally, the fact that there are not special correctional facilities to cater for inmates with different needs makes the situation worse. The correctional officers lack the training, skills or the knowledge to handle inmates with special needs such as deaf (Miller, Vernon and Capella, 2005). Therefore, the correctional facilities handle inmates with special needs in a similar way just as the other inmates. It is thus challenging for the correctional officers and for the deaf inmates to coexist. Moreover, there have been horror stories on the treatment meted on deaf inmates in different correctional facilities. The deaf persons are denied a wide range of human rights by virtual of their nature. The deaf inmates are separated from the rest of the inmates and are thus subjected to isolation. Equally, important, the laws in the United States are mean to protect everyone including persons with disabilities. However such law is violated and disregarded in the course of protecting deaf inmates. Deaf inmates encounter problems that are not encountered by other non-deaf inmates. The correctional facilities need to come up with means to enhance communication and interaction among deaf inmates thus enhancing their rehabilitation and reintegration in the society.
The creation of rules and policies to protect and improve the lives of deaf inmates is a step in the right direction. The policies need to cater and address the social, cultural, and health aspects of the deaf inmates. The laws and policies aimed at positively affecting the lives of deaf inmates need to be enforced and monitored to ensure they are not violated in the different correctional institutions (Miller and Vermon, 2002). There is a likelihood that the law enforcers and correctional are likely to violate the rules and policies of handling the deaf inmates and thus proper structures need to be founded for the implementation of the laws. For instance, the correctional officers need to be trained and coached on the implementation of the proposed policies.
The government and related parties need to adopt social welfare policy and theories in correctional facilities to ensure that human rights are observed for the inmates with disabilities such as the deaf. The socio welfare policy ensures that the deaf inmates are given conducive environment by adhering to human rights and wellbeing the deaf inmates (Miller and Vermon,2002). The policy will ensure that the deaf inmates are given proper care and assisted in communication, interactions and all other aspects of social life to enhance their rehabilitation.
1. Agency Description
This assignment will evaluate the application of the welfare policies and laws at the Georgia Department of Corrections. The information of the correctional facility can be found at https://abilitymagazine.com/defending-deaf-prisoners-in-georgia-who-are-forgotten-and-abused-by-the-prison-system/
Georgia department of corrections has abused and forgotten the plight of the deaf inmates thus subjecting them to mental torture and frustrations. The prison system has failed in offering the right care and services to deaf persons. First, the deaf persons are arrested without understanding the reasons for the arrest, taken through the criminal justice system until they are jailed. They are subjected to prison life where they are often punished for failure to follow rules and policies they are not aware of. The deaf inmate at the State of George has to suffer every day as there is no welfare department to take care of their different needs.
The plight of the deaf inmates at the state of Georgia have inclined the America Civil Liberties Union to file a motion in the federal court regarding the handling and care of deaf inmates that are incarcerated in correctional facilities across Georgia. The motion prescribes the best practices to be adopted in taking care of the deaf inmates by providing them adequate supporting resources such as ASL interpretations to explain rules or policies, tactile and visual alerts indicating emergencies and events.
The Georgia department corrections have continuously violated the Rehabilitation and the American with Disabilities Act in handling deaf. In this case, the corrections are cruel and unusual handling the prisoners. The deaf inmates thus face injustices when they are not given special treatment and are rather treated just as other inmates.
2. Needs Assessment
Introduction of the social welfare policy and law need to be introduced by conducting a need assessment exercise to establish the real issue on the ground. First, the need assessment begins with the gathering of relevant information and data (Fred, 2018). The data needs to be collected from the inmates, correction officers and the deaf inmates. The collection of data will be done by interviews and issuing a questionnaire to evaluate the challenges experienced by the deaf in the correctional facilities.
Then different methods of gathering data have benefits and limitations associated with them. Collection of data by use of questionnaires will enable the gathering of a wide range of information from different respondents thus enhancing the assessment and evaluation of the data. Questionnaires further enable the researcher to keep a record as a source of reference (Fred, 2018). In this regard, the researcher can retrieve the evidence once needed. On the other hand, the questionnaires have limitation in that not all questions will go unanswered thus adversely affecting the data collection of data. Also, questionnaires can be a misrepresentation of facts thus misleading the researchers. Consequently, interviews have their shares of benefits and limitation in the course of gathering data. Interviews enhance interactions among the parties to research thus one can get one on one answers and instant feedback. On the other hand, interviews have a limitation in that they cannot be conducted on deaf respondents.
The research at the agency indicates that the welfare of mates with disabilities is given similar care as those with no disability thus making life unbearable. Disabilities among the inmates make it hard to have similar capabilities such as those of other inmates (Fred, 2018). In this case, inmates with disability need to be assisted to meet their day to day obligation. For instance, the deaf inmates are subjected to regular punishment due to failure of observing rules and regulations. Failure to observe rules and regulations is occasioned by the inability to follow or understand regulation and orders given due to their condition.
Academic research on different literature and journals indicate that deaf inmates and other inmates with disability are subjected to unbearable conditions in correctional facilities due to their condition (Glasner and Miller, 2010). Deaf inmates are not given special treatment to assist them in their day to day operations. The assistance given to the deaf is meant to supplement their disability to ensure they can operate normally without challenges. The relevant assistant among the deaf prisoners is not exercised in correctional facilities to enable the deaf to meet their daily expectation on the road to their rehabilitation.
In addressing the unbearable conditions of the deaf inmates and other inmates with a disability, one would recommend the application of the social welfare policy in the correctional facilities (Glasner and Miller, 2010). The policy will ensure that social and health affairs are catered for in the course of their stay in the correctional facilities. The policies ensure that physical, emotional and health needs are met to ensure they lead a normal life thus increasing their chances of rehabilitation.
3. Policy Description and implementation
The deaf social welfare policy needs to be understood by all the criminal justice stakeholders thus enhancing its implementation and success (Krienert, Henderson and Vandiver, 2003). The correctional facility stakeholders need to be oriented in on the policy to enhance its successful implementation in the interest of deaf inmates and other inmates with such related disabilities.
Mission
The mission of the social welfare policy is to ensure that deaf inmates are given the right care regarding complementing their disability to ensure they lead a relatively normal life to ensure they are effectively rehabilitated and integrated into the society.
Goals
There are different goals associated with the application of the social welfare policies and laws among the deaf inmates in Georgia Correctional Facilities.
1. The polices will ensure that then deaf inmates helped to complement their different capabilities.
2. To ensure that the deaf inmates are subjected to a rehabilitation and reintegration path.
3. To ensure that deaf inmates are in a position to enjoy and use correctional facilities just as non-deaf inmates.
4. To ensure that the deaf inmates are effectively subjected to guidance and counselling, professional and technical training to enhance their economic life.
5. To ensure the deaf persons engage extra curriculum activities together with other non-deaf inmates.
6. To ensure that human rights are observed in the course of handling deaf inmates
Target population
The policy target population is at 500 inmates. The program will be implemented among the deaf inmates across the Georgia correctional facilities. The deaf inmates will be gathered in a single correctional facility to evaluate the effectiveness of the program.
The social program entails evaluating the current condition and lives of the deaf inmates and comparing the same life after the introduction of the welfare program (Krienert, Henderson and Vandiver, 2003). The welfare program will be enrolled through the application of the use of different resources and infrastructure aimed at ensuring the lives of the deaf inmates are substantially improved.
Implementation plan
The implementation of the plan will be done in steps and processes to ensure that the full benefits of the social policy are enjoyed. First, the program needs to be taken through the relevant agencies for assessment and evaluation. Evaluation and assessment will evaluate the benefits of the program in eliminating the challenges currently experienced by deaf inmates (Merjian, 2010). Upon the evaluation, the program will be approved and the relevant resources and funds will be directed towards the project. Consequently, the correctional officers and other persons tasked with the implementation of the project will be trained on different aspects of the project. Furthermore, the equipment, resources and tools to be used in the project will be availed for the actual exercise of the project. Moreover, deaf inmates will be then subjected to the program to ensure that the different goals of the projects are achieved. More so, follow up activities and reporting of the program will be done to assess and evaluate the progress.
4. Implication based on the theory and prior research
Theoretical assumption and research
The application of the social welfare project will be done while considering different assumptions. First, the implementation of the program assumes that all deaf inmates suffer from similar conditions and face similar challenges (Miller and Vermon, 2001). Consequently, the research assumes that all the deaf inmates will cooperate and accept the program thus the result of the program will be evaluated from all the inmates.
The program will effectively meet its goals since it will be readily accepted by the deaf inmates since it will positively change their lives. In this case, the lives of the deaf inmates will be easy and improved thus making it easy to implement and being accepted (Pollard, 1994). Additionally, all the stakeholders will be involved in the implementation of the program as well as availing the infrastructure to implement the program making the program to achieve high levels of success.
Pros and cons of the policy
The social welfare policy among deaf inmates will be characterized by its share of advantages and disadvantages. First, the program will be characterized by a wide range of advantages. The program will ensure that human rights and welfare of deaf inmates are upheld at all times (Bagenstos, 2004). Consequently, the social welfare program will ensure that deaf inmates can use and experience the prison facilities that are geared towards their rehabilitation and reintegration in society. Additionally, the social program will ensure that the deaf inmates disabilities are complemented thus making their normal life and operation effective. On the other hand, there are disadvantages associated with the implementation of the program (Glaner, 2006). The social program will require a lot of funds and resources to implement and lack of such resources will fail. Also, their implementation of the program will face resistance from different quotas such as non-deaf inmates thus resulting in barriers in the implementation.
Conclusion
The implementation of the social welfare programs in the correctional facilities in Georgia will result in a wide range of advantages despite the challenges and barriers in the implementation. The deaf inmates have been experiencing struggles and hardship in the different correctional facilities and the introduction of the welfare program is geared towards eliminating such challenges. The issues facing deaf inmates will be revealed by researching the different stakeholders in correctional facilities. The relevant parties will go to the implementation of the programs to realize the different goals and objectives. Equally important, the implementation of the projects will be faced with challenges and barriers.
References
Bagenstos, S. R. (2004). The future of disability law. Yale LJ, 114, 1.
Fred C. (2018). Deaf Federal Prisoner Wins Right to Qualified Interpreter and Access to Video Communication Device. Correctional Law Reporter (1-3).
Glasner, A. T. (2006). Deaf criminal offenders: Testing a model of deficient socialization. City University of New York.
Glasner, A. T., & Miller, K. R. (2010). Communication isolation as reported by a group of deaf Texas Inmates. W. Criminology Rev., 11, 1.
Krienert, J. L., Henderson, M. L., & Vandiver, D. M. (2003). Inmates with Physical Disabilities: Establishing a Knowledge Base. Southwest Journal of Criminal Justice, 1(1).
Merjian, A. H. (2010). Lonesome Agony: Heard v. the District of Columbia and the Struggle Against Disability Discrimination in the DC Penal System. Am. Crim. L. Rev., 47, 1491.
Miller, K. R., & Vernon, M. (2001). Linguistic diversity in deaf defendants and due process rights. Journal of deaf studies and deaf education, 6(3), 226-234.
Miller, K. R., & Vernon, M. (2002). Assessing linguistic diversity in deaf criminal suspects. Sign Language Studies, 380-390.
Miller, K. R., Vernon, M., & Capella, M. E. (2005). Violent offenders in a deaf prison population. Journal of deaf studies and deaf education, 10(4), 417-425.
Pollard Jr, R. Q. (1994). Public mental health service and diagnostic trends regarding individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing. Rehabilitation Psychology, 39(3), 147.
