Building more prisons does not reduce crime, but it likely increases the bank accounts of prison-builders. Experts, professionals and citizens alike share the common goal of working to reduce violence and victimization. However, at issue is how to accomplish this goal most effectively, efficiently, and beneficially.
When considering crime issues, an important point should be remembered: Offenders are much more like each of us than the animals or monsters they often are portrayed to be. Crime is not to be ignored or excused, but rather addressed humanely and compassionately for all who are involved. Victims, offenders, and family members of those involved frequently report that restorative justice approaches are more beneficial than punitive ones in resolving many typical episodes of violence.
A large body of research shows that punitive laws that create long prison sentences for offenders, make it difficult for them to find homes and employment upon release, and ignore positive motivation for living crime-free do not reduce future crime. Let me repeat: harsher prison sentences and stricter policies do not reduce crime. However, these laws provide an illusion of safety for many citizens, yet they are rooted in widespread myths rather than research. Such laws use up community resources, are expensive to maintain, create fear, and are not effective in protecting the community—despite their intention and popularity. Take a look at the large body of quality research on effective crime prevention and offender rehabilitation and you’ll see that much of public policy seems to be moving counter to current scholarship.
Efforts to reduce and prevent crime may be more successful by identifying and helping to meet the needs of fellow human beings. Perhaps by better understanding and appreciating the complex lives of people, we can better support and help those who are vulnerable and at risk. New approaches to understanding crime and offender rehabilitation, such as Dr. Tony Ward’s Good Lives Model, are focusing on identifying individuals’ needs and values, then utilizing strengths and resources to help people live better and more fulfilling lives. When important needs are met, there is less desire for people to turn to crime as an attempt to meet those needs. Research suggests that such approaches are cost-effective and reduce recidivism.
Leisure plays an important role in both the development of crime and the personal motivation of offenders to change their lives and remain crime-free. Offender leisure functions in many possible ways. Sometimes leisure—even “normal,” healthy experience—happens to be an unnoticed contextual factor in how crime occurs. These leisure patterns can be identified and purposefully disrupted to help prevent future crime. Other times, the absence of leisure seems to have an impact on the occurrence of crime.
Positive leisure experiences can be paired with traditional techniques to strengthen the potency of effective rehabilitation. Dr. Williams coined the term forensic leisure science in the academic literature to help map new territory where the field of leisure can assist criminology in preventing and addressing crime. This is an exciting new area that brings together multiple fields of knowledge.
Dr. Williams works with law enforcement and correctional agencies on matters of crime, deviance and leisure.
Selected Publications
- Williams, D J (2009). Turning monsters into people: A reflexive study of sex offenders and leisure. In the Journal of Unconventional Parks, Recreation and Tourism Research (online), volume 2.
- Williams, D J, & Walker, G. J. (2009). Does offender gambling on the inside continue on the outside? Insights from correctional professionals on gambling and re-entry. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 48, 402-415.
- Williams, D J (2009). Prisoner gambling: Correctional considerations and implications for re-entry. In Gambling Research Reveals (newsletter of the Alberta Gaming Research Institute), volume 9, issue 1.
- Williams, D J (2008). Offender gambling in prisons and jails: Is it hidden leisure experience? The Correctional Psychologist, 40 (3), 7-10.
- Williams, D J (2007). An experiment on the inclusion of strength training in offender substance abuse treatment. In K. Knight & D. Farabee (Eds.), Treating addicted offenders: A continuum of effective practices, volume II (Chapter 13).Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute.
- Williams, D J (2006). Forensic leisure science: A new frontier for leisure scholars. Leisure Sciences, 28, 91-95.
- Williams, D J, & Walker, G. J. (2006). Leisure, deviant leisure, and crime: Caution: Objects may be closer than they appear. Leisure / Loisir, 30, 192-218.
- Williams, D J (2006). Autoethnography in offender rehabilitation research and practice: Addressing the “us vs. them” problem. Contemporary Justice Review, 9, 23-38.
- Williams, D J, Walker, G. J., & Strean, W. B. (2005). Correctional recreation on death row: Should pardon be granted? Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 42 (2), 49-68.
- Williams, D J (2005). Crime and addiction series part 2—Sex offenders on prison gambling: Harmful addiction or opportunity for leisure? In Brief Addiction Science Information Source (BASIS—Harvard University School of Medicine peer-reviewed online journal).
- Williams, D J (2005). Exploring the functions of leisure and recreational activities within a sexual assault cycle: A case study. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity: The Journal of Prevention and Treatment, 12, 295-309.
- Williams, D J, & Strean, W. B. (2004). Physical activity as a helpful adjunct to substance abuse treatment. Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions, 4 (3), 83-100.
- Williams, D J (2003). “Quality of life” as perceived by sex offenders in a halfway house: Implications for treatment. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 38 (2), 77-93.
- Williams, D J, Strean, W. B., & Garcia Bengoechea, E. (2002). Understanding recreation and sport as a rehabilitative tool within juvenile justice programs. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 53 (2), 31-41.
- Williams, D J, & Strean, W. B. (2002). Quality of life: The foundation of offender rehabilitation? Forum on Corrections Research, 14 (2), 43-45.
Additional Links
