Knowledge acquisition have been consistently been an essential element in the criminal justice field. Knowledge could be obtained through personal experiences, tradition, authority, and intuition. In the context of personal experiences, ancient philosophical theories from Immanuel Kant has established that experience makes certain realities possible and thus these realities turn to create experience. (Baldacchino 2002, 25) As noted by Augustine, he indicated that personal experience could be shared through literature like diaries and autobiographies. (McPherson 2000, 170) Thus, experience is shared and at the same time knowledge is acquired. In the field of criminal justice, centuries of existence have created personal experiences in its maintenance and operations. The problem in this context is the need to access these personal experiences to acquire knowledge. On the other hand, knowledge acquisition on the context of tradition is normally based on culture and customs of a particular society. (Tonkinson 1997, 1) In the area of criminal justice, the use of tradition establishes the accepted courses of action and systems in the operation of its institutions. It thus builds on the scope and limitations of the criminal justice systems. The problem in this area is that the knowledge acquired based on tradition is not that stable and reliable given that there is a possibility that it could vary based on its geographical location. The context of knowledge acquisition in terms of authority indicates the need of an expert in the field. (Hoffman 1992, 110) In the case of criminal justice, institutions employ academics, theorists as well as those that have carried out long-standing and fruitful careers in the criminal justice system to establish the best practices in the field. It is a composite of knowledge acquisition initiatives such as personal experience and tradition. The problem of using authority in knowledge acquisition is that the data attained is based on the subjective perspective of the employed authority. In the same manner, there is the possibility that the knowledge may not fit the actual situations imminent in the individual criminal justice institutions. Lastly, the concept of intuition appears to be based primarily on the innate belief of a person on what is right and wrong.  (Kilpelainen 2000, 41) Thus, intuition holds true to knowledge that is classified as ethical or unethical. In the implementation of this knowledge acquisition in the criminal justice system, decision makers tend to tap all the other three methods, personal experience, tradition, and authority to gain fruitful outcomes.    


The Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) has been tasked in managing the correctional facilities of the state. Its mission statement is “to provide public safety, promote positive change in offender behavior, reintegrate offenders into society, and assist victims of crime.” To determine the level at which the corrections are taking their mandate seriously, the succeeding discussions will be analyzing the said mission statement with reference to the principles and the code of ethics of the American Correctional Association (ACA). As stated in the website of the ACA, there are seven principles in on which every member should adhere to: humanity, opportunity, accountability, justice, knowledge, protection, and competence.


In looking at the mission statement of the TDCJ, it appears that development of the individual inmates and victims are ensured. This shows direct connection with the basic elements of indicated in the guiding principles of the ACA. However, there is a clear disparity in the context where the employees of the correctional facilities are regarded. There is no mention of any consideration of the principles with reference to the welfare of the employees.


On the other hand, with consideration of the seventeen articles of the code of ethics of the ACA, it appears that the TDCJ has focused its attention on the rehabilitation of the inmates to establish a much safer public. In the same regard, the mission statement fails to regard the employees of the correctional facilities as a part of the machinery that makes the system work. Moreover, the mission statement has also failed to recognize the possibility of abuse of power from these employees, from the correctional officer to the high ranking officials in the department. This means that they have disregarded the professional duties of those that have immense power over these intuitions. Though the mission statement appears to be rather general, it shows that it is still open to unethical acts coming from those that are deemed the authority in these facilities. Moreover, though the reformation and rehabilitation of the individual convict is imperative, the TDCJ should also take into consideration those who will deal directly with these individuals. In any case, it is apparent based on the mission statement of the TDCJ that it seeks to improve on the current standing of society one convict at a time.


 


References


American Correctional Association. Available in: http://www.aca.org [Accessed 10 January 2008]


Baldacchino, J. (2002) “Ethics and the Common Good: Abstract vs. Experiential.” Humanitas. 15(2), 25.


Hoffman, R. (1992) The Psychology of Expertise: Cognitive Research and Empirical AI. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 


Kilpelainen, T. (2000) “Knowledge Acquisition for Generalization Rules.” Cartography and Geographic Information Science. 27(1), 41.


McPherson, C. (2000) “Augustine Our Contemporary.” Cross Currents. Spring-Summer 2000. 170.


Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Available in: http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/ [Accessed 10 January 2008]


Tonkinson, R. (1997) “Anthropology and Aboriginal Tradition: The Hindmarsh Island Bridge Affair and the Politics of Interpretation.” Oceania. 68(1), 1. 



Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com


0 comments:

Post a Comment

 
Top