Search results

1

Skuteczność resocjalizacji – w kręgu drażliwych pytań

100%

Bartkowicz Z.

Lubelski Rocznik Pedagogiczny

|

2016

|

vol. 35

|

issue 2

EN

The resocialization of the offender should be regarded as an ineffective activity considering the high rates of recidivism. Resocialization pedagogy, however, asks not only about the relapse into crime but also about favorable mental transformations that are the objective of educational and therapeutic measures. The still infrequent (longitudinal) studies on the psychic evolution taking place during the resocialization process show the low efficacy of measures, which does not, however, lead to a radical reform of resocialization institutions. The text shows the directions of research that might help in devising the ways to enhance the effectiveness of measures impacting the offender.

PL

Resocjalizowanie przestępcy uznać należy za działalność mało skuteczną, jeśli wziąć pod uwagę wysokie wskaźniki recydywy. Pedagogika resocjalizacyjna pyta jednak nie tylko o powrót do przestępstwa, ale także o korzystne przeobrażenia psychiczne, które są celem oddziaływań wychowawczych i terapeutycznych. Należące wciąż do rzadkości badania nad ewolucją psychiczną (longitudinalne), dokonującą się w procesie resocjalizacji, wskazują na niewielkąskuteczność oddziaływań, co jednak nie prowadzi do radykalnego reformowania instytucji resocjalizacyjnych. Wskazano na kierunki poszukiwań badawczych, które mogą być pomocne w ustaleniu sposobów zwiększenia skuteczności oddziaływań na przestępcę.

2

Rozmiary recydywy u młodocianych więźniów po upływie 10 lat od ich zwolnienia z zakładów karnych

89%

Szymanowski T.

Archiwum Kryminologii

|

1974

|

issue VI

156-177

EN

All the young adult prisoners (17-20 years old), discussed in this work were released in Poland in 1961. In that year from 40 prisons were released a total of 6,193 young adults, of whom 1,025 (16.5%) had previous convictions, while 5,168 (83.5%) had received prison sentences for the first time after having reached the age of 17. The basic object of these follow-up studies was to establish the frequency of recidivism among young adult offenders during the 10 years following their release from prison. The overwhelming majority (894) of those who had had previous convictions were subjects of research; a sample of 1,188 prisoners without previous convictions was taken at random. Data forming the basis for dividing young adult offenders into those with prior convictions and those without, did not take into account the period when they were not yet of age, with the exception of time spent in approved schools. This is most significant, since, as was found in juvenile courts of two cities ‒ Warsaw and Łódź – a considerable percentage of those investigated had already faced trial while still juveniles: this percentage amounted among those without previous conviction to 35%; among those with previous convictions ‒ to 56%. Though these data from big city centres cannot be extrapolated in relation to those of the total of the young people studied, who also come from small towns and villages, they are nevertheless significant. When examining the extent of recidivism during the 10-year period after release, it should be borne in mind that among those with previous convictions as well as among those without previous convictions there were some who were socially maladjusted already as children and adolescents (between 10 and 16). The number of previous convictions (including also detainment in approved schools) of young adults were as follows: 79% had been once convicted, 14% ‒ twice, and 4% ‒ three times or more (as concerning the remaining 3% no accurate data were available as to the number of previous convictions). Thus almost one-fifth of those with previous convictions had already before their release in 1961 faced trial at least three times. Data related to the domicile of those investigated before they were sent to prison (released in 1961) are as follows: ‒ 57% of those without previous convictions had urban domiciles, and 43% rural; ‒ 73% of those with previous conviction had urban domiciles and 27% ‒ rural; Among the cases studied, urban residents predominate, notably among those with previous convictions. Subsequent convictions of young adult offenders were checked twice ‒ in 1967 and 1972 on the basis of their criminal records, revealing all the convictions and each prison term. After the end of the l0-year follow-up period, the average age of those investigated with and without previous convictions amounted to 30 years. After the follow-up period ‒ ten years from the time of release from prison in 1961 ‒ frequency of recidivism among former young adult prisoners amounted to: (a) 82% of those with previous convictions were convicted anew; (b) 57% of those without previous convictions were convicted again. As regards this high percentage of recidivism, it should be borne in mind that the cases studied are not representative of the total of young adult offenders but only of those who have been sentenced to imprisonment by the courts and the fact, already mentioned, that a considerable percentage of the young adults studied were socially maladjusted from childhood. Since the ten-year follow-up period was very long, it was divided into two five-year periods: 1961-1966 and 1967-1972. It was found that a very large percentage of young adult offenders were convicted in both the first and the second five years: those without previous convictions ‒ 26%, those with prior convictions ‒ 46%. As regards those convicted in the first five-year period, they account only for 23% of those without and 19% of those with previous convictions. The corrresponding percentages for those convicted in the second fiveyear period only are: 11% and 12%. If we differentiate former young adult prisoners who had no court records and those who did have them in the first five-year period, but committed no offences in the second five-year period, we find that a total of 63% of young adult offenders without and 42% with previous convictions were not convicted again after having reached the age of approximately 22-25 years. Study of the extent of recidivism during the follow-up period showed that among offenders convicted during the two five-year periods there was a marked predominance of recidivists with multiple ‒ at least four ‒ convictions: they accounted for 65% of those without and 61% of those with previous convictions. But among those convicted in only one of the five-year periods there was a predominance of those with only one or two convictions. They accounted for 65% of the relevant category of former young adult prisoners. Research among urban inhabitants without previous convictions revealed markedly more frequent recidivism (75%) than among such living in rural areas (54%). Among the group with previous convictions, 87% of those living in urban areas became recidivists and as many as 77% of those living in rural areas. Thus there exists a substantial group among young adult prisoners living in the rural areas who display a distinct tendency towards recidivism; it was, however, impossible to establish whether those formerly living in rural areas may not during the follow-up period have lived or commuted to work in towns. A remarkable tendency to recidivism was observed not only among young adult offenders who in 1961 had been in prison, after having been convicted of theft of personal property (79% of the subsequent recidivists among those without and 85% of those with previous convictions), but also among those who were convicted of theft of social property (59% and 38%), for offences against the public officials and government offices (60% and 79%), and against life and health (46% and 75%). This seems to confirm the hypothesis that a substantial percentage of those convicted of such offences, are also individuals who suffered from serious social maladjustment at an early age. The results of the present work bear out the findings of various Polish as well as foreign publications to the effect that imprisonment of young adult offenders suffering from social maladjustment is of very little effect. In view of the marked probability that the majority of these young adult offenders revealed even in childhood symptoms of social maladjustment, it is clearly advisable that prophylaxis should concentrate primarily on taking precautions to avoid the appearance of social maladjustment in children and the young.

3

BADANIE NA TEMAT KRYMINALNYCH I SOCJOLOGICZNYCH ZACHOWAŃ RECYDYWISTÓW ORAZ ŚRODKÓW ZAPOBIEGAWCZYCH W ODNIESIENIU DO SYTUACJI PRAWNO-KARNEJ PAŃSTWA BANGLADESZ

75%

Islam S., Goswami A.

International Journal of Legal Studies (IJOLS)

|

2019

|

vol. 5(1)

385-393

PL

W kryminologii recydywa jest jednym z najbardziej podstawowych pojęć. Oznacza powrót jednostki do zachowań przestępczych, które już zostały ukarane lub były przedmiotem interwencji. Recydywa to przestępcze działania, które doprowadziły do ponownego aresztowania lub powrotu do więzienia z nowym wyrokiem, lub bez niego po tymczasowym zwolnieniu więźnia. Recydywa mierzy się poprzez przewlekłe zachowania przestępcze prowadzące do licznych i ponownych aresztowań. Badania przeprowadzone w Bangladeszu wykazały, że ponad połowa uwięzionych otrzymała wyroki za ponowne dokonanie poprzednio popełnionych już przestępstw. Głównymi przyczynami tej sytuacji są zwyczajowe przestępcze zachowania przestępców, za krótkie kary pozbawienia wolności i niewystarczające środki podejmowane przez instytucje karne. Obecnie w Bangladeszu recydywa jest najbardziej krytycznym wyzwaniem dla walki z terroryzmem. Chociaż liczba recydywistów rośnie w więzieniach Bangladeszu z powodu luk w krajowym systemie sądowniczym, bardzo ważne jest, aby zająć się nimi w dłuższej perspektywie. Celem tego badania jest wyjaśnienie przyczyn przestępczego zachowania recydywistów i zasugerowanie pewnych zaleceń dotyczących ograniczenia recydywy w Bangladeszu. recydywa, zachowanie przestępcze, ponowne aresztowanie, więzienie, kara, uwięzienie, system sądowniczy

4

Rozmiary recydywy u nieletnich podsądnych sprawców kradzieży

71%

Strzembosz A.

Archiwum Kryminologii

|

1974

|

issue VI

140-155

EN

The subject of this work are the findings of studies of the follow-up period intended to establish the further fate of 343 juvenile delinquents aged 10-16, who had been guilty of theft while still under 17. In 1961 detailed, criminological research was initiated in the Juvenile Court of Praga – one of the districts of Warsaw – (records were studied, interviews undertaken in the environs, homes and schools were conducted), which embraced all the 180 juvenile delinquents between 10-16 years, living in that district, who during the course of one year had been found guilty of theft. Further a study was made of the criminal records of 178 juvenile thieves from two other districts of Warsaw, all the juvenile delinquents who had been tried for theft by courts during the period from August 1961 to May 1962 being investigated in turn. In this way was obtained a total of 358 juvenile delinquents who had been found guilty of thefts. The idea was to find out how many of them were recidivists in the follow-up period. 33% of these juvenile delinquents were under 13 and 67% were between 13 and 16 years. The division into these two groups was justified because of the different approach of the Polish penal code to minors up to the age of 13: as regards such juvenile delinquents, the court may apply educational measures only: reprimand, supervision by parents, probation and placing in an educational institution. As regards delinquents between 14 and 16, the court may also apply correctional measures – i.e. approved schools. In the present work, the author accepts as basic criterion for defining the recidivist the fact that he has faced in a Juvenile Court a new charge of theft. The category of those not considered as recidivists includes only delinquents charged once with theft. Each juvenile delinquent who has been charged (usually by the police) a second or third time with theft already figures as a recidivist with 2, 3, 4 and more appearances in court. Moreover, it was possible during the investigations, combined with detailed interviews in the homes of the delinquents, additionally to qualify as recidivists such juvenile delinquents shown to have stolen though not brought before a court. Taking into account the variety of criteria applied to recidivists, they have been divided into the following categories: (a) first of all, formal criteria were applied: considered as recidivists were those concerning whom the court had previously applied educational and correctional measures. Here, the percentage of recidivists amounted to 37.7; (b) this percentage increased to 48.6 when considered as recidivists were all those who had been charged at least twice with theft, including those concerning whom the court had not considered it relevant to apply any new measures; (c) this percentage was still higher (61.2), when listed as recidivists were all those whom the court had found guilty of at least two thefts; (d) interviews in the environment conducted as regards 180 juvenile delinquents in a single district revealed in addition that these data too were not entirely reliable in defining recidivists. Data from interviews showed that the percentage of delinquents who had committed more than one theft amounted to as much as 78.5. It was also found that, when applying the first, formal criterion recidivists among the older delinquents (46%) were far greater in numbers than among the younger (20%). The second criterion – at least two thefts – showed that the difference between older and younger delinquents as regards the percentage of recidivism among them (82.2% 73.2%) was only slight. These data indicate that the formal criterion for recidivism, used by Juvenile Courts, does not reflect the actual extent of this phenomenon. This is the more important since, the latter, broader definition, was found to be the most satisfactory for prognostic purposes. It was established that during the two-year follow-up period a substantially larger number of juvenile delinquents previously listed, according to the first formal definition, as not being recidivists (47%), faced charges than was the case with those listed according to the second definition (17.6%). Criminological investigations – combined with interviews conducted in their families – of 180 juvenile delinquents from a single district, revealed that juvenile delinquents charged with theft are as a rule socially maladjusted children, showing the first symptoms of social maladjustment even in the first grades of primary school. With 62% symptoms of demoralization were recorded with children between 7 and 10 years of age. A typical phenomenon with these juveniles is a considerable lag in their school studies, found as regards 95% of older and 76% of younger juveniles. A lag of at least two years was found with 77% of the older and 37% of the younger individuals investigated. The majority of these systematically played truant; 37% of the younger and 70% of the older juveniles had run away from home. Only as regards 33% was it not found that they consumed alcohol; 26% drank at least once a week; 25% of the recidivists were heavy drinkers. On the basis of data obtained from mothers during interviews (and for 50% of the cases also from child guidance clinics, institutions etc.) it was possible with 60% of the older investigated delinquents to establish various types of personality disorders; 26% were suspected of having suffered organic disturbances of the central nervous system; data indicating such diseases in the past were more frequently found with recidivists (37%) than with those who were not recidivists (13%). Those investigated were for the most part brought up in an unsatisfactory family environment. It was found that in 46% of the families fathers or step-fathers systematically drank alcohol to excess; delinquency of fathers was noted in 31% of the families, and in 9% the mothers were suspected of prostitution. As many as 67% of the brothers revealed symptoms of demoralization and 47% had committed theft. Recidivists differed markedly from non-recidivists as regards such negative features, characterizing the family environment as: systematic abuse of alcohol, unhappy married life of the parents, children very poorly cared for. Of all the 358 thieves investigated, a mere one-third were as juveniles (under 17) charged only once: thus they were not recidivists according to the criteria accepted in the investigation; 21% had twice faced a court; 11% – three and 34% – four or more times had been charged before a Juvenile Court. The differentiated groups of the youngest and oldest among those we investigated did not differ markedly as regards the number of appearances in court while under age. Consideration was next given to further delinquency during the period when the investigated were young adults i.e., when they were between 17 and 20. New offences were noted during that period with 50% of the former defendants who, previously had been juveniles. It also emerged that the number of charges preferred while they were under age was of essential significance for recidivism during the period when those investigated were already young adults. Among those who had been charged only once as juveniles, only 27% were afterwards convicted between the age of 17 and 20; among those charged twice – 48%; beginning with 3 charges, the percentage of later recidivists amounted to 65.8, and with 4 and more charges – to as much as 78.7%. The number of convictions while juveniles indicates a correlation not only with the actual fact of recidivism when those concerned were still young adults, but also the intensification of recidivism between 17 and 20. The majority of those who while juveniles had only one case against them, were subsequently convicted only once. But of those who while juveniles were charged at least three times, the majority (64%) had multiple convictions between 17 and 20. Typical of offences committed by those who had been charged with theft as juveniles, continued to be theft; close on half of those investigated, however – and this should be emphasized – were convicted for offences against the person, officials or the authorities, and these as a rule were offences committed while intoxicated. One-third of the subjects spent in prison at least half of the four-year period, while they were young adults. In 1972, when the last follow-up period was studied, ten years had elapsed since the beginning of the investigation of the delinquents who had committed theft while juveniles. The younger among them were at that time 20 to 23 years old; the older – 24 to 27 (the average age being about 26 years). As regards these 243 older investigated individuals, it was possible to examine not only the period when they were young adults, but also the later period, after they were already 21 years old; this later period was in their case sufficiently to make it possible properly to evaluate whether during that time they had ceased committing offences or whether they continued to do so. Further delinquency of the older among those investigated during the period after 17 until their average age was about 26, was as follows: – It emerged that only 38% had not been convicted at all after the age of 17. The overwhelming majority of them (83%) had been charged only once or twice while under age. – 17% had been convicted only between 17 and 20, while 13% had been convicted only after 21. – 32% were convicted as young adults as weil as later after the age of 21. In this group, the majority (73%) had been charged before a court at least three times as juveniles. As regards the older among those investigated for the entire follow-up period, it was confirmed that the majority showed a correlation with what happened during their juvenility: further delinquency as well as persistent recidivism was found more frequently with those who were more frequently charged as juveniles. During the entire follow-up period, 19% of the older individuals were convicted only once, l3% – twice, and 30% – at least three times. The category with multiple convictions, recidivists convicted at least four times amounted to 20%, which certainly is a substantial figure, having regard to the relatively long prison sentences passed on those convicted two and three times. It should be added that though interviews in the environment during the follow-up period were lacking, making impossible a proper evaluation of the social adjustment of those investigated who during that period had no new convictions or were convicted only once, the data obtained enable the drawing of conclusions which are important for social policy. Note that even frorn among the investigated juveniles who were charged only once before a court, as many as 42% were later convicted after 17; this points to the necessity of a thorough examination of even apparently minor cases of theft involving those under age who previously had not been convicted. The extent of persistent recidivism revealed demonstrates the poor effectiveness of methods used as far in dealing with juvenile delinquents who revealed symptoms of marked social maladjustment.

5

Perspektywa efektywności w resocjalizacji

63%

Sztuka J.

Studia Paedagogica Ignatiana

|

2018

|

vol. 21

|

issue 1

85-105

PL

Weryfikacja podejmowanych działań jest najistotniejszym etapem procesu zmian. Dzieje się tak również w procesie resocjalizacji, którego celem jest powrót resocjalizowanej jednostki do społeczeństwa oraz uzyskanie takich zmian w jej zachowaniu, aby przestrzegała ona obowiązujących w nim zasad i norm oraz właściwie wypełniała przypisane jej role społeczne. Taka perspektywa zakłada szereg systemowych oraz zindywidualizowanych działań zmierzających do wyposażenia osoby resocjalizowanej w umiejętność autostymulacji do samorozwoju oraz rozwiązywania sytuacji problemowych innowacyjnie i odmiennie od dotychczasowych sposobów. Niniejszy artykuł jest próbą prezentacji bogatego dorobku opracowań oraz różnorodności podejmowanych perspektyw badawczych efektywności, która od lat stanowi przedmiot interdyscyplinarnego zainteresowania, mobilizując pedagogów do poszukiwania kryteriów ustalania jej poziomu, determinantów oraz wyjaśniania znaczenia samego pojęcia.

EN

Verification of activities undertaken is the most significant phase of the process of change. This is also applicable to the resocialization process, aimed at returning a resocialized individual to society and changing the individual’s behavior in a way to make the person observe social norms and regulations and correctly fulfill one’s social role. Such a perspective assumes the use of numerous systemic and individualized activities aimed at equipping a resocialized person with the ability to stimulate self-development and solve problematic situations in an innovative way. The following article is an attempt to present the richness of a prolific scientific study on the topic of effectiveness, which has been an object of interdisciplinary interests for years, mobilizing scholars to search for criteria that could be used to determine the level of effectiveness, its determining factors and clarify the meaning of the term itself.

6

Współczesne problemy resocjalizacji

63%

Kopczyńska-Wisz J.

Roczniki Pedagogiczne

|

2019

|

vol. 11(47)

|

issue Numer specjalny

257-270

PL

Zagadnienia dotyczące współczesnych problemów resocjalizacji wskazują, że proces resocjalizacji jest bardzo złożony. Czynniki egzogenne i endogenne w dużym stopniu utrudniają podejmowanie działań zmierzających do ponownej socjalizacji osób dotychczas niedostosowanych społecznie. Podkreślić należy, że mimo to resocjalizacja się odbywa i niejednokrotnie przynosi pożądane efekty. Osoby resocjalizujące dokładają wszelkich starań, by pomimo utrudnień, osoby, które są poddawane działaniom resocjalizacyjnym zrozumiały, że tylko życie zgodne z normami prawnymi prowadzi do rozwoju, zadowolenia i sukcesów.

EN

Issues related to contemporary problems of resocialization make us realize that the process of resocialization is very complex. Exogenous and endogenous factors make it very difficult to undertake actions aimed at re-socialization of people who have not been socially adapted to date. It should be emphasized that despite this, rehabilitation takes placeand often brings the desired results. Resocializing persons make every effort to ensure that despite impediments, people who are subjected to rehabilitation activities understand that only living in accordance with legal norms leads to development, satisfaction and successes.

7

The Impact of Relapse into Crime on the Degree of Offender’s Guilt in Canon Law and Polish Law

63%

Cichawa K.

Biuletyn Stowarzyszenia Absolwentów i Przyjaciół Wydziału Prawa Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego

|

2019

|

vol. 14

|

issue 16 (2)

155-166

EN

Relapse into crime is disturbing for two reasons. First of all, it highlights the ineffectiveness of the penalty imposed on the perpetrator. Second, it is a violation of legal norms and legal order, which should be observed in every community. Both the ecclesiastical and secular legislator acknowledge the need to regulate the institution of recidivism. Both legal orders formulate criteria to be met for recidivism to occur. Both in canon law and Polish penal law, these criteria are cumulative. However, in canon law, recidivism is a circumstance that may aggravate the penalty for a prohibited act. Whether to increase the penalty will therefore depend on the judge’s prudent assessment. The secular legislature, on the other hand, does envisage higher penalties for re-offending but based on the type of recidivism in place. If it is ordinary special recidivism, whether to tighten the punishment is left to the judge’s discretion. In the case of multiple special recidivism, to mete out a more severe penalty is mandatory.

PL

Powrót do przestępstwa jest zdarzeniem niepokojącym głównie z dwóch powodów. Po pierwsze świadczy o nieskuteczności zastosowanej kary wymierzonej sprawcy przestępstwa. Po drugie jest obrazą norm prawnych i porządku prawnego, które powinny być przestrzegane w każdej społeczności. Zarówno prawodawca kościelny, jak i świecki dostrzega potrzebę regulacji takiej instytucji. W obu porządkach prawnych zostały określone przesłanki konieczne do zaistnienia recydywy. Zarówno w prawie kanonicznym, jak i polskim prawie karnym są to przesłanki łączne. Jednakże na gruncie prawa kanonicznego recydywa jest okolicznością, która może zwiększyć karę za popełniony czyn. Zwiększenie dolegliwości kary będzie zatem zależało od roztropnej oceny sędziego. Ustawodawca świecki natomiast uzależnia wymierzenie większej kary 166 od rodzaju recydywy, której dopuścił się sprawca. Jeśli była to recydywa specjalna zwykła zaostrzenie kary pozostaje fakultatywne. W przypadku recydywy specjalnej wielokrotnej wymierzenie surowszej kary jest obowiązkowe.

8

Współuzależnienie w relacji z recydywistą

63%

Jarzębińska A.

Studia Paedagogica Ignatiana

|

2023

|

vol. 26

|

issue 3

185-206

EN

Codependency, understood as a dysfunctional and learned pattern of coping with stress, occurs in a variety of relationships, including in women living with repeat offenders. This particular context of codependency is poorly explored by researchers. The purpose of this study was to determine what features described as characteristic of codependency in a relationship with an alcoholic occur in women’s relationships with repeat offenders. The material for the study consisted of discussions in online forums in which women described their experiences of living with repeat offenders. The discussions were examined using the content analysis method. It was found that partners of repeat offenders followed behavioral scripts typical of women living with alcoholics. In particular, these included trying to stabilize and control the man’s criminal activity, giving him unconditional help and support, using psychological defense mechanisms to lift his responsibility for the crime committed, and distorting reality by activating a system of illusions and fantasies. As a result of these behaviors, women created a cycle that was difficult to break, which resulted in negative experiences, such as loss of self-esteem, illness, separation from their social circles, and in some cases, it meant problems with the law for the partner. Due to the fact that women’s pathological attachment to repeat offenders is a barrier to their partners’ withdrawal from criminal activity, it is worth offering repeat offenders serving their sentences appropriate educational programs.

PL

Współuzależnienie rozumiane jako dysfunkcyjny i wyuczony wzór radzenia sobie ze stresem występuje w różnych relacjach, w tym u kobiet żyjących z recydywistami. Jest to kontekst zjawiska słabo rozpoznany przez badaczy. Celem podjętego badania było ustalenie, jakie własności opisane jako charakterystyczne dla współuzależnienia w relacji z alkoholikiem występują w związkach kobiet z recydywistami. Materiał do badania pochodził z dyskusji na forach internetowych, w których uczestniczyły kobiety z doświadczeniem życia z recydywistą. Dyskusje zbadano metodą analizy treści. Ustalono, że partnerki recydywistów stosują skrypty zachowań typowe dla kobiet żyjących z alkoholikami. Były to zwłaszcza: podejmowanie prób stabilizowania i kontrolowania przestępczej aktywności mężczyzny, udzielanie mu bezwarunkowej pomocy i wsparcia, stosowanie psychologicznych mechanizmów obronnych w celu zniesienia jego odpowiedzialności za przestępstwo, zniekształcanie rzeczywistości przez uruchomienie systemu iluzji i fantazji. W następstwie tych zachowań kobiety tworzyły trudny do przerwania cykl, który skutkował dla nich negatywnymi przeżyciami, m.in. spadkiem poczucia własnej wartości, chorobami, separowaniem się od własnego środowiska społecznego, a na niektóre z nich partner ściągnął problemy z prawem. Ze względu na fakt, że patologiczne przywiązane kobiety do recydywisty jest barierą w odstąpieniu przez niego od działalności przestępczej, warto zaoferować recydywistom odbywającym wyroki odpowiednie programy edukacyjne.

9

Dalsze losy nieletnich i młodocianych sprawców przestępstw

62%

Batawia S., Żabczyńska E., Strzembosz A., Szymanowski T.

Archiwum Kryminologii

|

1974

|

issue VI

126-127

EN

Three follow-up studies were published, dealing with juvenile delinquents and young adult offenders, based on a random sample and material on: ‒ 100 boys charged with larcency, who during the period of the investigation in 1966 were barely 10-11 years old. This research concentrated in turn on all the 10-11 year-old boys charged with larcency and brought before a Juvenile Court in Warsaw; the follow-up period embraced 5 years; ‒ 358 former juveniles (10-16 years old) charged with theft in three districts of Warsaw and brought before a Juvenile Court in 1961-1962, whose further fate was investigated during the period when they were 17-20 years old and from among the same 243 former juveniles 13-16 years old, who in 1972 were already 24-27 years old; ‒ 17-20 year-old young adults released from 40 prisons throughout the country, after having served their sentences for various offences and whose subsequent recidivism was established during the course of 10 years from their release from prison in 1961. Two works, discussing the further recidivism of the juvenile delinquents, convicted for larcency obviously differ markedly regarding the age and follow-up period. The first work deals with the investigated up to the age of 15-16 only, the second also embraces the time when the former juveniles are already approximately 26 years old. However, both works unanimously emphasize the fundamental significance of early initiation of social maladjustment and demoralization for the prognosing of the rapidity and extent of recidivism. They stress the necessity to make use in practice as the only criterion for recidivism of juveniles, each new charge brought before a court and the number of times theft has been committed, being the subject of a given trial. Simultaneously these works reveal unanimously, that the majority of the juvenile delinquents charged with larcency, are brought up in families, which are unable to guarantee them the proper conditions for normal development and that in these families also many brothers of the juvenile delinquents charged with larcency revealed symptoms of social maladjustment and committed offences. The results of the studies under discussion also are unanimous as to the fact that with the majority of the juveniles could be found personality disorders. The material under discussion deserves special attention as regards the juvenile delinquents of the younger age groups. It is of great significance that many of the investigated 10‒11-year-olds charged with larcency committed theft already before. Long years of research, conducted by the Department of Criminology, Institute of Legal Sciences, Polish Academy of Sciences, testify to the fact that the majority of the juvenile delinquents charged with larcency and brought before Juvenile Courts are boys who already previously committed larcency more than once. Disturbance of the socialization process with these juveniles, usually reaches back to their early childhood, requires early discovery and interference at the earliest possible time in the form of surrounding the parents, brothers and sisters of the juvenile delinquent with care and also of controlling them. The results yielded by follow-up studies of the recidivism during a period of 10 years of the 17-20 year-old young adult offenders, released from prison in 1961, concentrate on young people whose recidivism is undoubtedly connected with serious social maladjustment already during their juvenility. Obviously one cannot identify these young adults released from prison with all the 17‒20-year-old young adults convicted by courts who received various sentences. The results of the follow-up studies of the young adult prisoners should contribute to the initiation of systematic, individual research regarding young adults convicted and receiving various prison terms and to the change of certain guiding lines of the penal and penitentiary policy in regard to young adult offenders.

PL

Publikacja posiada następującą strukturę: Wstęp I. Ewa Żabczyńska: Dalsze losy 100 chłopców mających sprawy o kradzieże w wieku 10-11 lat II. Adam Strzembosz: Rozmiary recydywy u nieletnich podsądnych sprawców krażeży III. Teodor Szymanowski: Rozmiary recydywy u młodocianych więźniów po upływie 10 lat od ich zwolnienia z zakładów karnych

10

Wielokrotnie karani recydywiści w wieku 26-35 lat w świetle badań kryminologicznych

62%

Archiwum Kryminologii R.

Archiwum Kryminologii

|

1969

|

issue IV

7-10

11

Efektywność nadzoru ochronnego (wyniki badań 232 recydywistów poddanych nadzorowi ochronnemu)

54%

Rzeplińska I.

Archiwum Kryminologii

|

1983

|

issue X

55-85

EN

1.The 1969 Penal Code introduced a new system of sanctions for offences committed by habitual criminals in special circumstances. Two new categories of special recidivism are here introduced: special basic recidivism (Art. 60, § 1 of the Penal Code), and special multi-recidivism (Art. 60, § 2 of the Penal Code). The legal consequences of a conviction under Art. 60, § 1 or § 2 are as follows: 1) longer terms of imprisonment, 2)the application of special measures: protective supervison and commitment to a social readaptation centre, These measures take effect after the prison sentence has been served. Under the protective supervision system, the habitual offender is free, but supervised for a period of 3-5 years. The readaptation centre is a closed institution. The habitual offender is sent there for a minimum period of two years, up to a maximum of five years. After two years the penitentiary court may free the recidivist if it thinks he is unlikely to commit another crime after regaining his freedom. The conditions under which a person is sent to a readaptation centre differ, according to whether he or she was sentenced under Art. 60, §1 or Art. 60, § 2 of the Penal Code. A recidivist may be sent to a readaptation centre by either the criminal court or the penitentiary courts. The decision to apply these measures may be taken at diverse stages of the juridical and penitentiary process: 1) when the sentence is pronounced (by the criminal court), 2) towards the end of the prison sentence (penitentiary court), or 3) during the period of protective supervision (penitentiary court). In the first of the three stages mentioned above, the recidivist senrenced under Art. 60, § 1 of the Penal Code may or may not be put under protective supervison. It is not obligatory. In the case of a person sentenced under § 2 of Art. 60 of the Penal Code, it is obligatory either to put him under protecive supervision or to send him to a social readaptation centre. The decision to send a recidivist to a social readaptation centre (a more severe measure) is taken only if the court is of the opinion that protective supervision would be insufficient io prevent a return to crime. In the second of the three stages mentioned above, towards the end of the recidivists's sentence the penitentiary court takes the following decisions: 1) it may put the habitual criminal under protective supervision if that was not done in the sentence of the criminal court; 2) it may alter the decision of the criminal court and put the offender under a protective supervision order instead of sending him to a social readaptation centre. The third and last stage in which decisions are taken about the application of special measures, is when the offender is actually under the supervision of a Probation Officer. If the supervision is not working out satisfactorily, the recidivist may be sent to a social readaptation centre. 2.The habitual offender is supervised by a Probation Officer after he has served his prison sentence. No person who is under protective supervision may change his place of residence without the consent of the court. He is obliged to appear in court if summoned, and to carry out the court's recommendations (Art. 63 of the Penal Code). The court may order the recidivists: 1. to perform an obligation incumbent on the sentenced person to provide support for another person; 2. to perform specified work for a social purpose; 3. to perform remunerated work, pursuing an education or preparing for an occupation; 4. to refrain from abusing alcohol; 5. to submit to medical treatment; 6. to refrain from frequenting specified surroundings or places; 7. other appropriated behaviour in the period of protective supervision, if it may prevent the commission again of an offense. During the protective supervision period, the court may issue orders, or extend or alter those already given. During the protective supervision period the recidivist comes under the supervision of a Probation Officer appointed by the court, who at the same time is responsible for organizing the resocialization of the person being supervised. Protective supervision ceases: 1 when the appointed period of probation is at an end, and when probation has been successful, 2) Or aerlier, if the person being supervised fails to carry out the orders and obligations placed on him, or if he makes it impossible or difficult for the purpose of the protective supervison order to be attained (e.g. by committing a crime when under supervision, which means that the supervision was unsuccessful, 3) owing to causes which bring supervision to an end (e.g. death of the supervised person). 3. The study reported here dealt with one of the two special measures mentioned above - protective supervision. The main problem examined is the effectiveness of protective supervision. Protective supervision is a system which has two goals: one is to keep the supervised person from committing another crime (here we may speak of the restraining function of supervision), while the other is to resocialise the person on supervision (in this case we may speak of the resocialising function of probation). The key question asked by anyone who examines the effectiveness of some penal measure is: whether, and to what extent, does it attain its aims? With this definition in mind, the effectiveness of probation was examined in two fields. In the first (narrower) field, the author asked if there had been a juridical improvement in the behaviour of persons put under supervision. In the second (wider) field, success was measured by the extent of the supervised persons resocialisation - that is, an attempt was made to find out how the supervised person functioned in society, that is, whether he kept to the basic social norms that society expects,of its members. In both fields, the moment of time when effectiveness of supervision was assessed was that at which supervision ceased. Those who successfully completed their period of probation were checked again at the end of 38 months, to see whether or not they had reverted to crime. The group studied here consisted of all male recidivists in Warsaw who were put under a protective supervision order in 1971-1972. There were 232 persons in the group. Two research techniques were used. ln the first, the relevant documents were studied (documents concerning previous criminal caces, prison documents, records of the course of protective supervision, data, about previous convictions, as well as about periods spent in penal institutions and in remand). In the second, the recidivist was interviewed on the basis of a questionnaire. 4. Out of the 232 persons investigated, 43.1 % completed the supervision period successfully, 53.3% failed to do so, and in 3.4% of the cases death intervened. In this group of recidivists who had been put under supervision the author differentiated three groups: Group I - taken as having been resocialised during the supervision period, and as having successfully completed their supervision. This group consisted of 57 men (26% of the total number studied). Group II – regarded as not having been resocialised, but that completed the probation period successfully, without ill consequences for themselves. Group II consisted of 43 men (19% of the total). Group III, consisting of men who were not resocialised, and who as a result suffered the additional ill effect of being isolated in the social readaptation centre; this group failed to complete their supervision successfully. In this group were 124 men (55% of the total). Some of the unresocialised men in Group III did not carry out any of the duties or orders given them. Some reverted to crime even although for a time they carried out their duties and orders. Some did not carry out their duties and orders, and reverted to crime. In this group the supervision system failed to fulfil the functions expected of it. With regard to those who did not carry out their obligations and orders it failed in its resocialisation function, while with regard to the others, who committed a crime while under supervision, it failed in both its functions: restraint and resocialisation. The following characteristics were found in Groups I, II and III. Group I consisted mostly of the youngest men (only one-eighth of the group were over 40). They were educated at least up to elementary school standard (approx. age 14-15). During the probation period they carried out work that called for skills. They were physically healthy. In their case the supervision period was one in which their lives were financially more stable (they had paid jobs). They also had stable family lives, and started their own a families. Of all the groups, they had the fewest convictions up to the time the probation period began. They had mainly committed offences against property, but a significant number had been gauilty of crimes of a predominantly aggressive nature. Drunkenness was not noted among them during the supervision period. The men in this group declared that after they had come out of prison and been put under protective supervision they had no special trouble in beginning life again in freedom. They also said they were pleased with life. Group II consisted of men who, judged from the formal point of view, completed their supervision period successfully. But their behaviour during supervision, and above all their heavy drinking, does not justify us in regarding them as having been resocialised. These were habitual criminals who when put under supervision were older (mostly over the age of thirty), as compared witn the men in Group I. As many as a quarter of the men in Group II were habitual criminals aged forty and over. Compared with the men in Group I, they were less well educated, and worse qualified for jobs. Among them various types of physical complaints were found, possibly because they were older, and possibly also because they had a longer career of crime. Fewer of them were married. They seemed to make little effort to achieve financial stability. During the supervision period they frequently changed their job - often because of some infringement of discipline, or because they arbitrarily threw up their job. When they began probation, they had more convictions behind them than the men in Group I. Group II had the lowest number of men who had committed serious crimes against property, or serious aggressive crimes. They were guilty mostly of petty crimes. Above all the habitual criminals in this group are the most awkward ones from the social point of view. They were the ones who mostly said they were dissatisfied with their lives. While on supervision they did not give up heavy drinking. Moreover, although ordered to take a "drying-out" cure , they did not go for treatment at all, or did so irregularly. Before their conviction they had worked irregularly, with gaps in between jobs, but during the whole supervision period they worked. Groups III: protective supervision was a failure with group. As compared with the other groups the men in this one had more previous convictions - the average number of previous convictions being nearly six. More of them, as compared with the men in the other groups, went in mainly for crimes against property; the minority went in for crimes of a predominantly aggressive character and crimes of diverse types. Half of the men in Group II came into the 21-30 age group when ,they began supervision, while the other half were older (moreover, one-seventh were habitual criminals aged over forty). Even at the beginning of supervision the men in this group were in a worse situation than the others - especially as compared with the men in Group II, for they were worse educated, and worse prepared for earning living. The majority of the men in this group were single. Only one in five was married. Their health was noticeably poorer than that of the men in the other groups. Most of the men in this group drank heavilly during the supervision period. The men here confessed that immediately after getting out of prison they had trouble in getting back to a normal life. The main obstacles were lack of money, and the difficulty in finding a job. When questioned they said that on the whole they were not happy about their lives. The majority (72.6%) had reverted to crime while on supervision. The others had been taken out of supervision because they did not carry out their obligations ot the orders or the probation officer. 6. In this study of men put under protective supervision, one in every four is reckoned to have been a success. it was noted that during the supervision period factors that made for success were: setting up a family, having a regular skilled job, and avoidance of heavy drinking. In view of the above, it is the youngest habitual criminals who have the best chance of completing their supervision period successfultry. Age is in their favour, they have a better chance of a stable family life, they are better educated, better fitted for a job, they do not show the symptoms of social degradation associated with alcoholism, Because of these factors they are more likely to be able to return to a normal life. 7. During a period of 38 months from the end of the each man's supervision period, a check was kept on whether or not these men had further convictions. The men covered by this part of the study were those in Groups I and II, that is, those who successfully completed their probation. Thirteen men from Group I and twelve men from Group II (that is, twenty-five men altogether), had subsequent convictions. They constituted 25% of the two groups. It may therefore be stated that the majority (three-quarters) of the men in Groups I and II had no convictions during the thirty-eight months following the end of their supervision period. 8. In the supervised groups studied here, we took one quarter as having been resocialised by the end of supervision, one-fifth as having at most improved formally, and over a half as not having been resocialised - in their case supervision ended in failure. On the basis of this study it may be stated that the chief criterion on which the man on supervision was judged (and on which the success of the supervision proces was judged) was whether or not he carried out the instruction to have a paid job. This was due to two reasons: in the first place, if the man was in paid employment, it mean that he was fulfilling at least the minimum of the demands made on him during the supervision period (this minimum was: to earn his own living). Secondly, it was easy for both the Probation Officer and for the man he was supervising to check whether this order was being carried out, and how. The implementation of their instructions was treated as being of less importance. The main one was to have paid employment. If the man being supervised was in a job, but failed to carry out other instructions given to him, the Probation Officers did not ask for him to be taken off supervision. At the present moment, when reform of the criminal law in Poland is under discussion, one of the problems being examined is that of the penal liability of people who revert to crime, and the question of what legal penalties should be imposed on them. It has been pointed out during this discussion that the severe legal penalties imposed on habitual criminals during the last ten years have not been effective. Consequently the question still remains open: whether we should not apply the special measures described above - protective supervision or commitment to a social readaptation centre after the prison sentence is served. What we have learned from the use of a closed institution such as a social readaptation centre shows that it is completely ineffective. As for protective supervision, it has been postulated that this way of controlling the behaviour of habitual criminals should be transferred from the sphere of penal measures to the sphere of social security measures. It has been suggested that within the framework of post penitentiary care, specific medsures to help, which would be carried out by the probation officers, would be available to habitual criminals after coming out of prison.

PL

1.The 1969 Penal Code introduced a new system of sanctions for offences committed by habitual criminals in special circumstances. Two new categories of special recidivism are here introduced: special basic recidivism (Art. 60, § 1 of the Penal Code), and special multi-recidivism (Art. 60, § 2 of the Penal Code). The legal consequences of a conviction under Art. 60, § 1 or § 2 are as follows: 1) longer terms of imprisonment, 2)the application of special measures: protective supervison and commitment to a social readaptation centre, These measures take effect after the prison sentence has been served. Under the protective supervision system, the habitual offender is free, but supervised for a period of 3-5 years. The readaptation centre is a closed institution. The habitual offender is sent there for a minimum period of two years, up to a maximum of five years. After two years the penitentiary court may free the recidivist if it thinks he is unlikely to commit another crime after regaining his freedom. The conditions under which a person is sent to a readaptation centre differ, according to whether he or she was sentenced under Art. 60, §1 or Art. 60, § 2 of the Penal Code. A recidivist may be sent to a readaptation centre by either the criminal court or the penitentiary courts. The decision to apply these measures may be taken at diverse stages of the juridical and penitentiary process: 1) when the sentence is pronounced (by the criminal court), 2) towards the end of the prison sentence (penitentiary court), or 3) during the period of protective supervision (penitentiary court). In the first of the three stages mentioned above, the recidivist senrenced under Art. 60, § 1 of the Penal Code may or may not be put under protective supervison. It is not obligatory. In the case of a person sentenced under § 2 of Art. 60 of the Penal Code, it is obligatory either to put him under protecive supervision or to send him to a social readaptation centre. The decision to send a recidivist to a social readaptation centre (a more severe measure) is taken only if the court is of the opinion that protective supervision would be insufficient io prevent a return to crime. In the second of the three stages mentioned above, towards the end of the recidivists's sentence the penitentiary court takes the following decisions: 1) it may put the habitual criminal under protective supervision if that was not done in the sentence of the criminal court; 2) it may alter the decision of the criminal court and put the offender under a protective supervision order instead of sending him to a social readaptation centre. The third and last stage in which decisions are taken about the application of special measures, is when the offender is actually under the supervision of a Probation Officer. If the supervision is not working out satisfactorily, the recidivist may be sent to a social readaptation centre. 2.The habitual offender is supervised by a Probation Officer after he has served his prison sentence. No person who is under protective supervision may change his place of residence without the consent of the court. He is obliged to appear in court if summoned, and to carry out the court's recommendations (Art. 63 of the Penal Code). The court may order the recidivists: 1. to perform an obligation incumbent on the sentenced person to provide support for another person; 2. to perform specified work for a social purpose; 3. to perform remunerated work, pursuing an education or preparing for an occupation; 4. to refrain from abusing alcohol; 5. to submit to medical treatment; 6. to refrain from frequenting specified surroundings or places; 7. other appropriated behaviour in the period of protective supervision, if it may prevent the commission again of an offense. During the protective supervision period, the court may issue orders, or extend or alter those already given. During the protective supervision period the recidivist comes under the supervision of a Probation Officer appointed by the court, who at the same time is responsible for organizing the resocialization of the person being supervised. Protective supervision ceases: 1 when the appointed period of probation is at an end, and when probation has been successful, 2) Or aerlier, if the person being supervised fails to carry out the orders and obligations placed on him, or if he makes it impossible or difficult for the purpose of the protective supervison order to be attained (e.g. by committing a crime when under supervision, which means that the supervision was unsuccessful, 3) owing to causes which bring supervision to an end (e.g. death of the supervised person). 3. The study reported here dealt with one of the two special measures mentioned above - protective supervision. The main problem examined is the effectiveness of protective supervision. Protective supervision is a system which has two goals: one is to keep the supervised person from committing another crime (here we may speak of the restraining function of supervision), while the other is to resocialise the person on supervision (in this case we may speak of the resocialising function of probation). The key question asked by anyone who examines the effectiveness of some penal measure is: whether, and to what extent, does it attain its aims? With this definition in mind, the effectiveness of probation was examined in two fields. In the first (narrower) field, the author asked if there had been a juridical improvement in the behaviour of persons put under supervision. In the second (wider) field, success was measured by the extent of the supervised persons resocialisation - that is, an attempt was made to find out how the supervised person functioned in society, that is, whether he kept to the basic social norms that society expects,of its members. In both fields, the moment of time when effectiveness of supervision was assessed was that at which supervision ceased. Those who successfully completed their period of probation were checked again at the end of 38 months, to see whether or not they had reverted to crime. The group studied here consisted of all male recidivists in Warsaw who were put under a protective supervision order in 1971-1972. There were 232 persons in the group. Two research techniques were used. ln the first, the relevant documents were studied (documents concerning previous criminal caces, prison documents, records of the course of protective supervision, data, about previous convictions, as well as about periods spent in penal institutions and in remand). In the second, the recidivist was interviewed on the basis of a questionnaire. 4. Out of the 232 persons investigated, 43.1 % completed the supervision period successfully, 53.3% failed to do so, and in 3.4% of the cases death intervened. In this group of recidivists who had been put under supervision the author differentiated three groups: Group I - taken as having been resocialised during the supervision period, and as having successfully completed their supervision. This group consisted of 57 men (26% of the total number studied). Group II – regarded as not having been resocialised, but that completed the probation period successfully, without ill consequences for themselves. Group II consisted of 43 men (19% of the total). Group III, consisting of men who were not resocialised, and who as a result suffered the additional ill effect of being isolated in the social readaptation centre; this group failed to complete their supervision successfully. In this group were 124 men (55% of the total). Some of the unresocialised men in Group III did not carry out any of the duties or orders given them. Some reverted to crime even although for a time they carried out their duties and orders. Some did not carry out their duties and orders, and reverted to crime. In this group the supervision system failed to fulfil the functions expected of it. With regard to those who did not carry out their obligations and orders it failed in its resocialisation function, while with regard to the others, who committed a crime while under supervision, it failed in both its functions: restraint and resocialisation. The following characteristics were found in Groups I, II and III. Group I consisted mostly of the youngest men (only one-eighth of the group were over 40). They were educated at least up to elementary school standard (approx. age 14-15). During the probation period they carried out work that called for skills. They were physically healthy. In their case the supervision period was one in which their lives were financially more stable (they had paid jobs). They also had stable family lives, and started their own a families. Of all the groups, they had the fewest convictions up to the time the probation period began. They had mainly committed offences against property, but a significant number had been gauilty of crimes of a predominantly aggressive nature. Drunkenness was not noted among them during the supervision period. The men in this group declared that after they had come out of prison and been put under protective supervision they had no special trouble in beginning life again in freedom. They also said they were pleased with life. Group II consisted of men who, judged from the formal point of view, completed their supervision period successfully. But their behaviour during supervision, and above all their heavy drinking, does not justify us in regarding them as having been resocialised. These were habitual criminals who when put under supervision were older (mostly over the age of thirty), as compared witn the men in Group I. As many as a quarter of the men in Group II were habitual criminals aged forty and over. Compared with the men in Group I, they were less well educated, and worse qualified for jobs. Among them various types of physical complaints were found, possibly because they were older, and possibly also because they had a longer career of crime. Fewer of them were married. They seemed to make little effort to achieve financial stability. During the supervision period they frequently changed their job - often because of some infringement of discipline, or because they arbitrarily threw up their job. When they began probation, they had more convictions behind them than the men in Group I. Group II had the lowest number of men who had committed serious crimes against property, or serious aggressive crimes. They were guilty mostly of petty crimes. Above all the habitual criminals in this group are the most awkward ones from the social point of view. They were the ones who mostly said they were dissatisfied with their lives. While on supervision they did not give up heavy drinking. Moreover, although ordered to take a "drying-out" cure , they did not go for treatment at all, or did so irregularly. Before their conviction they had worked irregularly, with gaps in between jobs, but during the whole supervision period they worked. Groups III: protective supervision was a failure with group. As compared with the other groups the men in this one had more previous convictions - the average number of previous convictions being nearly six. More of them, as compared with the men in the other groups, went in mainly for crimes against property; the minority went in for crimes of a predominantly aggressive character and crimes of diverse types. Half of the men in Group II came into the 21-30 age group when ,they began supervision, while the other half were older (moreover, one-seventh were habitual criminals aged over forty). Even at the beginning of supervision the men in this group were in a worse situation than the others - especially as compared with the men in Group II, for they were worse educated, and worse prepared for earning living. The majority of the men in this group were single. Only one in five was married. Their health was noticeably poorer than that of the men in the other groups. Most of the men in this group drank heavilly during the supervision period. The men here confessed that immediately after getting out of prison they had trouble in getting back to a normal life. The main obstacles were lack of money, and the difficulty in finding a job. When questioned they said that on the whole they were not happy about their lives. The majority (72.6%) had reverted to crime while on supervision. The others had been taken out of supervision because they did not carry out their obligations ot the orders or the probation officer. 6. In this study of men put under protective supervision, one in every four is reckoned to have been a success. it was noted that during the supervision period factors that made for success were: setting up a family, having a regular skilled job, and avoidance of heavy drinking. In view of the above, it is the youngest habitual criminals who have the best chance of completing their supervision period successfultry. Age is in their favour, they have a better chance of a stable family life, they are better educated, better fitted for a job, they do not show the symptoms of social degradation associated with alcoholism, Because of these factors they are more likely to be able to return to a normal life. 7. During a period of 38 months from the end of the each man's supervision period, a check was kept on whether or not these men had further convictions. The men covered by this part of the study were those in Groups I and II, that is, those who successfully completed their probation. Thirteen men from Group I and twelve men from Group II (that is, twenty-five men altogether), had subsequent convictions. They constituted 25% of the two groups. It may therefore be stated that the majority (three-quarters) of the men in Groups I and II had no convictions during the thirty-eight months following the end of their supervision period. 8. In the supervised groups studied here, we took one quarter as having been resocialised by the end of supervision, one-fifth as having at most improved formally, and over a half as not having been resocialised - in their case supervision ended in failure. On the basis of this study it may be stated that the chief criterion on which the man on supervision was judged (and on which the success of the supervision proces was judged) was whether or not he carried out the instruction to have a paid job. This was due to two reasons: in the first place, if the man was in paid employment, it mean that he was fulfilling at least the minimum of the demands made on him during the supervision period (this minimum was: to earn his own living). Secondly, it was easy for both the Probation Officer and for the man he was supervising to check whether this order was being carried out, and how. The implementation of their instructions was treated as being of less importance. The main one was to have paid employment. If the man being supervised was in a job, but failed to carry out other instructions given to him, the Probation Officers did not ask for him to be taken off supervision. At the present moment, when reform of the criminal law in Poland is under discussion, one of the problems being examined is that of the penal liability of people who revert to crime, and the question of what legal penalties should be imposed on them. It has been pointed out during this discussion that the severe legal penalties imposed on habitual criminals during the last ten years have not been effective. Consequently the question still remains open: whether we should not apply the special measures described above - protective supervision or commitment to a social readaptation centre after the prison sentence is served. What we have learned from the use of a closed institution such as a social readaptation centre shows that it is completely ineffective. As for protective supervision, it has been postulated that this way of controlling the behaviour of habitual criminals should be transferred from the sphere of penal measures to the sphere of social security measures. It has been suggested that within the framework of post penitentiary care, specific medsures to help, which would be carried out by the probation officers, would be available to habitual criminals after coming out of prison.

12

Prawo jako jeden z mechanizmów wzrostu przestępczości

54%

Płatek M.

Archiwum Kryminologii

|

1985

|

issue XII

37-45

13

Partnerki życiowe recydywistów i ich rola w powstrzymywaniu aktywności przestępczej.

51%

Szczepanik R.

Profilaktyka Społeczna i Resocjalizacja

|

2015

|

vol. 26

35-57

PL

Pojęcia i relacje opisane w niniejszym artykule zostały wygenerowane z biografii mężczyzn odbywających karę pozbawienia wolności w więzieniu dla recydywistów (więcej niż trzeci raz). Analizie danych towarzyszyły procedury metodologii teorii ugruntowanej. W artykule podjęto się próby opisu pewnych typów kobiet oraz nadania znaczenia relacjom, jakie łączą ich z recydywistami w kontekście osłabiania aktywności przestępczej mężczyzn. Zainteresowaniem objęto jedynie te kobiety, z którymi recydywista nie pozostawał w relacji z powodu więzi biologicznych, a które pojawiły się w jego życiu w okresie, gdy „kariera przestępcza” była już ugruntowana. Okazuje się, że dla recydywistów, którzy po opuszczeniu zakładu karnego podejmują próby zerwania z wizerunkiem przestępcy, relacje z pewnym typem kobiet stanowią kluczowy czynnik sukcesu. To właśnie tego rodzaju związki (stanowiące narzędzie kontroli społecznej oraz źródło motywacji do zerwania z przestępczym stylem życia) i kobiety je tworzące znajdują się w głównym polu analiz podjętych w artykule.

EN

Concepts and personal relations discussed in this paper have been generated based on biographies of men who have served their prison sentence (more than three times) in the reoffender penitentiary center. Data analysis has been performed following the methodology of the grounded theory. The paper attempts at featuring the “profiles” of women and at making meaningful their relations with reoffenders, and in particular at determining their impact on reducing their criminal activities. The study covers solely those women who are in relations with reoffenders for reasons other than biological kinship, and who entered their lives when their “criminal career” had been in full bloom. The analysis shows that for reoffenders who, after leaving prison, try to leave behind their image of criminal, the relations with a “specific type” of women are a key factor of success. These relationships (as a tool of social control and a source of motivation to leave behind the criminal lifestyle) and women who get involved are the main research topics discussed in the paper.

14

Planowanie „własnej przyszłości” przez recydywistów a kierunki oddziaływań resocjalizacyjnych

51%

Wach T.

Rozprawy Społeczne

|

2016

|

vol. 10

|

issue 4

13-19

PL

W artykule wskazano na znaczenie problemu „własnej przyszłości” u recydywistów penitencjarnych i wykazano związek z efektywnością procesu resocjalizacji. Omówiono zagrożenia związane z patologizacją obszaru planowania swojego życia i podkreślono konieczność wpływania na kształt planów życiowych sprawców przestępstw jako warunku skutecznej resocjalizacji. Odniesiono się do problemu efektywności działania szeroko rozumianego systemu służb społecznych.

EN

The article discusses the importance of creating ”one’s own future” by persistent offenders and its correlation with the efficiency of the re-socialisation process. It describes the risks associated with the pathologisation in the sphere of life planning and emphasises the need of shaping life plans by offenders themselves as the precondition for effective re-socialisation. Finally, it refers to the significance of efficacy of the system of all social services.

15

Przestępczość w nurcie diagnozy kryminologicznej

51%

Tur S.

Rozprawy Społeczne

|

2016

|

vol. 10

|

issue 4

20-24

PL

W artykule wskazano na znaczenie problemu „własnej przyszłości” u recydywistów penitencjarnych i wykazano związek z efektywnością procesu resocjalizacji. Omówiono zagrożenia związane z patologizacją obszaru planowania swojego życia i podkreślono konieczność wpływania na kształt planów życiowych sprawców przestępstw jako warunku skutecznej resocjalizacji. Odniesiono się do problemu efektywności działania szeroko rozumianego systemu służb społecznych.

EN

The article discusses the importance of creating ”one’s own future” by persistent offenders and its correlation with the efficiency of the re-socialisation process. It describes the risks associated with the pathologisation in the sphere of life planning and emphasises the need of shaping life plans by offenders themselves as the precondition for effective re-socialisation. Finally, it refers to the significance of efficacy of the system of all social services.

16

Inspektor pracy jako organ postępowania mandatowego oraz oskarżyciel publiczny w postępowaniu w sprawach o wykroczenia

51%

Dadak J.

Roczniki Administracji i Prawa

|

2017

|

vol. 17/zeszyt specjalny

399-414

PL

Celem artykułu jest przybliżenie problematyki działalności inspektora pracy w zakresie jego ustawowych kompetencji dotyczących ścigania wykroczeń przeciwko prawom pracownika oraz egzekwowania odpowiedzialności karnej w dwóch trybach postępowania przewidzianych przez kodeks postępowania w sprawach o wykroczenia, a mianowicie w postępowaniu sądowym oraz mandatowym. Opracowanie jest próbą omówienia instytucjonalnych rozwiązań przyjętych przez ustawodawcę w zakresie uprawnień inspektorów pracy do występowania w charakterze oskarżyciela publicznego i organu postępowania mandatowego. Artykuł ten ma również na celu scharakteryzowanie zakresu uprawnień, w jakim inspektorzy pracy mogą stosować instytucje materialnego prawa wykroczeń do ścigania wykroczeń przeciwko prawom pracownika oraz osób wykonujących pracę zarobkową.

EN

The aim of the article is to introduce the issue of labor inspector activities within its statutory powers to prosecute offenses against employee rights and enforcement of criminal responsibility in two modes of procedure provided for by the Code of Conduct in misdemeanor cases, namely in the regular procedure and mandate. This publication is an attempt to explain the institutional solutions adopted by the legislature in the field of competence of differences between the various authorities with powers to act as a public prosecutor, as well as the body fine proceedings. This article is also intended to clarify procedural differences regarding the response capabilities of criminal law between offenses against the rights of the employee, and the offenses contained in other laws and legal workers.

17

WPŁYW SYTUACJI OSOBISTEJ SKAZANYCH NA ICH RESOCJALIZACJĘ I ADAPTACJĘ SPOŁECZNA

51%

Felczak J.

Polityka Społeczna

|

2020

|

vol. 47

|

issue 9(558)

18-24

EN

The article analyzes the problems that influence the personal situation of the convicts, hindering their rehabilitation and social readaptation. Four main factors are specified: lack of family and intimate relationships, addictions, debt, recidivism by choice. The four areas are discussed in detail on the basis of the research conducted by the Author. The article also presents the circumstances that increase and decrease the chances of readaptation.

PL

W artykule analizowane są problemy kształtujące sytuację osobistą skazanych, stanowiące bariery resocjalizacji i readaptacji społecznej. Wyszczególniono cztery główne czynniki: brak rodziny i relacji intymnych, uzależnienia, zadłużenie oraz recydywa jako wybór i postawa. Obszary te zostały omówione szczegółowo na podstawie wyników badań prowadzonych przez autorkę tekstu. Przedstawiono okoliczności zwiększające i zmniejszające szanse readaptacyjne.

18

Kara nieredukowalnego dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności (art. 77 § 3 k.k.) jako przykład nowej recydywy jurydycznej?

51%

Tyburcy T.

Studia Prawnicze: rozprawy i materiały

|

2023

|

vol. 33

|

issue 2

123-152

EN

The Act of 7 July 2022 amending the Act – Criminal Code and certain other acts introduced into the Criminal Code the possibility for the court to impose the sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of parole (Article 77 § 3 and 4 of the Criminal Code), which constitutes a novelty in Polish criminal law and is widely criticised by the legal community. The legislator has provided two grounds for the optional imposition of life imprisonment without possibility of parole. The article discusses Article 77 § 3 of the Criminal Code is based on formal grounds: a previous final conviction for a specific type of crime (against life and health, freedom, sexual liberty, public security or of a terrorist nature) for life imprisonment or imprisonment for a period of not less than 20 years. It introduces a new form of juridical (legal, special) one-time recidivism. Fulfilment of its prerequisites, however, does not tighten the limits of life imprisonment, but the possibility of imposing it with the prohibition of conditional release.

PL

Ustawa z dnia 7 lipca 2022 r. o zmianie ustawy – Kodeks karny oraz niektórych innych ustaw wprowadziła do Kodeksu karnego możliwość wymierzenia przez sąd kary nieredukowalnego dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności, czyli z zakazem warunkowego przedterminowego zwolnienia (art. 77 § 3 i 4 k.k.), co stanowi novum w polskim prawie karnym i jest powszechnie krytykowane przez środowisko prawnicze. Ustawodawca przewidział dwie podstawy do fakultatywnego orzeczenia kary nieredukowalnego dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności. Artykuł omawia art. 77 § 3 k.k., który opiera się na przesłankach formalnych, tj. uprzednim prawomocnym skazaniu za określony rodzaj przestępstwa (przeciwko życiu i zdrowiu, wolności, wolności seksualnej, bezpieczeństwu powszechnemu lub o charakterze terrorystycznym) na karę dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności lub karę pozbawienia wolności na czas nie krótszy niż 20 lat. Wprowadza nową postać recydywy jurydycznej (prawnej, specjalnej) jednokrotnej. Spełnienie jej przesłanek nie powoduje jednak obostrzenia granic kary dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności, lecz możliwość wymierzenia jej z zakazem warunkowego zwolnienia.

19

Systemy wykonania kary pozbawienia wolności a powrót do przestępstwa w zarysie prawnym i psychologicznym

51%

Maruszewska A.

Studia Prawnicze: rozprawy i materiały

|

2023

|

vol. 33

|

issue 2

235-248

EN

The penalty of imprisonment is to contain a full ailment expressing condemnation for the committed prohibited acts. The Executive Penal Code indicates that the purpose of imprisonment is to “arouse in the convict the will to cooperate in shaping his socially desirable attitudes, in particular the sense of responsibility and the need to comply with the legal order and thus refrain from returning to crime”, and thus – preventing recidivism. The main task is to prepare the convict for life in freedom, shaping his responsibility for his actions, as well as the will to cooperate for his social readaptation. In view of the above, the legislator introduced the institution of three punishment enforcement systems into the Executive Penal Code and thus gave a high degree to the issue of interactions undertaken during the execution of a penalty of imprisonment, additionally emphasizing it in the name given to each system. This study uses the analysis of the resulting statistical data from own research and literature on the subject in the scope of discussing the systems of execution of the penalty of imprisonment and their impact on recidivism. What causes convicts to return to crime after serving a sentence of imprisonment? Will a well-chosen system of serving a prison sentence really prevent the risk of recidivism?

PL

Kara pozbawienia wolności ma zawierać pełną dolegliwość wyrażającą potępienie dla popełnionych czynów zabronionych. Kodeks karny wykonawczy wskazuje, że celem kary pozbawienia wolności jest wzbudzanie w skazanym woli współdziałania w kształtowaniu jego społecznie pożądanych postaw, w szczególności poczucia odpowiedzialności oraz potrzeby przestrzegania porządku prawnego i tym samym powstrzymania się od powrotu do przestępstwa, a co za tym idzie – zapobiegnięcie powrotu do przestępstwa. Zasadniczym zadaniem jest przygotowanie skazanego do życia na wolności, kształtowanie jego odpowiedzialności za czyny, a także woli współdziałania na rzecz jego readaptacji społecznej. Z uwagi na powyższe ustawodawca wprowadził do Kodeksu karnego wykonawczego instytucję trzech systemów wykonywania kary i tym samym przyznał wysoki stopień problematyce oddziaływań podejmowanych w trakcie wykonywania kary pozbawienia wolności, dodatkowo ją akcentując w nadanej każdemu systemowi nazwie. W niniejszym opracowaniu posłużono się analizą danych statystycznych wynikających z prowadzonych badań własnych oraz literaturą przedmiotu w zakresie omówienia systemów wykonywania kary pozbawienia wolności oraz ich wpływu powrotność do przestępstwa. Co powoduje, że skazani po odbyciu kary pozbawienia wolności decydują się na powrót do przestępstwa? Czy rzeczywiście dobrze dobrany system wykonywania kary pozbawienia wolności pozwoli zapobiec ryzyku powrotu do przestępstwa?

20

Employment as a Part of Rehabilitation: A Review of Similarities and Differences between Female and Male Criminals

51%

Felczak J.

Studia Iuridica Lublinensia

|

2023

|

vol. 32

|

issue 5

77-104

PL

W artykule poglądowym zaprezentowano najnowszą wiedzę z zakresu znaczenia zatrudnienia w procesie resocjalizacji. Celem jest przegląd literatury oraz analiza podobieństw i różnic między skazanymi kobietami i mężczyznami w zakresie zatrudnienia w czasie pozbawienia wolności, a także szans na znalezienie zatrudnienia po zwolnieniu. Analizowane są też związki pomiędzy zatrudnieniem a późniejszą recydywą. Aby w sposób całościowy przedstawić związek zatrudnienia i recydywy, odniesiono się do następujących punktów: rola pracy w resocjalizacji i adaptacji do wolności; różnice między mężczyznami i kobietami w zakresie doświadczeń zawodowych oraz specyfiki pochodzenia społecznego wpływającego na ich przywiązanie do rynku pracy; zatrudnianie więźniów przed, w trakcie i po karze; możliwości i bariery w znalezieniu pracy przez byłych więźniów; relacja dwukierunkowa – zatrudnienie jako sposób na reintegrację byłego skazanego ze społeczeństwem oraz jako sposób zapobiegania recydywie. Wyodrębniono różne fazy resocjalizacji (przebywanie w zakładzie karnym, opuszczenie zakładu karnego) oraz omówiono związek z rynkiem pracy przed odbyciem kary pozbawienia wolności. Artykuł zawiera także dyskusję, w której przedstawiono wnioski i rekomendacje. Ponadto sformułowano wskazania do dalszych badań, a jednym z nich jest zbadanie realnych korzyści, jakie płyną z pracy skazanych – czy zapewnia ona możliwość utrzymania się. W artykule odniesiono się do wyników badań z różnych krajów, a co za tym idzie z różnych systemów sądownictwa.

EN

In this review article, the latest knowledge in the area of the importance of employment in the process of rehabilitation is presented. The goal is a literature review and an analysis of the similarities and differences between female and male criminals in the context of employment during the prison sentence and the chances of finding employment after release. Also, the relationships between employment and later recidivism are analyzed. To present the relationship between employment and recidivism holistically, the following points were referred to: the role of work in rehabilitation and adaptation to freedom; differences between males and females in employment experiences and peculiarities in social background affecting their labour force attachment; the employment of prisoners before, during and after punishment; opportunities and barriers in finding a job by former prisoners; bidirectional relationship – employment as a way to reintegrate ex-offender with the society and as a way to prevent recidivism. Different phases of rehabilitation (being in prison, leaving prison) were distinguished and labour force attachment prior to imprisonment spell were also discussed. Also, the article consists of a discussion section where conclusions and recommendations are presented. The indications for further research were also listed, one of which is to examine the real benefit of the work of convicts – whether it provides the possibility of subsistence. In the article, study results from various countries, and consequently, various judicial systems, are referred to.

Refine search results

Skuteczność resocjalizacji – w kręgu drażliwych pytań

Rozmiary recydywy u młodocianych więźniów po upływie 10 lat od ich zwolnienia z zakładów karnych

BADANIE NA TEMAT KRYMINALNYCH I SOCJOLOGICZNYCH ZACHOWAŃ RECYDYWISTÓW ORAZ ŚRODKÓW ZAPOBIEGAWCZYCH W ODNIESIENIU DO SYTUACJI PRAWNO-KARNEJ PAŃSTWA BANGLADESZ

Rozmiary recydywy u nieletnich podsądnych sprawców kradzieży

Perspektywa efektywności w resocjalizacji

Współczesne problemy resocjalizacji

The Impact of Relapse into Crime on the Degree of Offender’s Guilt in Canon Law and Polish Law

Współuzależnienie w relacji z recydywistą

Dalsze losy nieletnich i młodocianych sprawców przestępstw

Wielokrotnie karani recydywiści w wieku 26-35 lat w świetle badań kryminologicznych

Efektywność nadzoru ochronnego (wyniki badań 232 recydywistów poddanych nadzorowi ochronnemu)

Prawo jako jeden z mechanizmów wzrostu przestępczości

Partnerki życiowe recydywistów i ich rola w powstrzymywaniu aktywności przestępczej.

Planowanie „własnej przyszłości” przez recydywistów a kierunki oddziaływań resocjalizacyjnych

Przestępczość w nurcie diagnozy kryminologicznej

Inspektor pracy jako organ postępowania mandatowego oraz oskarżyciel publiczny w postępowaniu w sprawach o wykroczenia

WPŁYW SYTUACJI OSOBISTEJ SKAZANYCH NA ICH RESOCJALIZACJĘ I ADAPTACJĘ SPOŁECZNA

Kara nieredukowalnego dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności (art. 77 § 3 k.k.) jako przykład nowej recydywy jurydycznej?

Systemy wykonania kary pozbawienia wolności a powrót do przestępstwa w zarysie prawnym i psychologicznym

Employment as a Part of Rehabilitation: A Review of Similarities and Differences between Female and Male Criminals