halfway house

The Turman Halfway House, a Texas Youth Commission halfway house in Austin, Texas

"Halfway houses" are sometimes referred to in criminological/social research as: transitional residential facilities, residential housing facilities, transitional residences and/or sheltered-care facilities. Such places may encompass a broad definition of treatment modalities. There is a trend in the current body of social/behavioral sciences research to focus mainly on 3 types of halfway houses: 1) Ex-convict work release transitional residences; 2) Transitional residences for substance abuse; and 3) transitional residence for mental/psychiatric problems (see: Kilburn and Costanza 2011).

Definitional Problems

There are several methodological barbs to operationalizing the term "halfway house" in social sciences research. Some halfway houses are state sponsored while others (mainly addiction recovery homes and mental illness homes) are run by "for profit" entities. In most criminological research the purpose of a halfway house, is to allow people to begin the process of reintegration with society, while still providing monitoring and support. This type of living arrangement is often believed to reduce the risk of recidivism or relapse when compared to a straight release directly into society(^[1]; ^[2]; ^[3]; ^[4]).

Some halfway houses are meant solely for reintegration of persons who have been recently released from prison or jail, others are meant for people with chronic mental health disorders, and most others are for people with substance abuse issues. The state-placement of ex-criminal offenders to a "halfway house" (work-release, substance or mental health)after a prison stint may either be decided upon as part of a judge's sentence or upon a prison official's recommendation. In addition, a direct sentence to a halfway house may be decided upon by a judge or prosecutor in lieu of prison time.

Still it is important to remember that tranisitonal recovery arragements are many times voluntary residence arrangements and many "halfway house" residents may have no criminal record whatsoever. This is a social justice issue of high order, as there is often political opposition from neighborhoods where halfway houses attempt to locate.

United States

Most programs in the United States make a distinction between a halfway house and a sober/recovery house. A halfway house has an active rehabilitation treatment program run throughout the day, where the residents receive intensive individual and group counseling for their substance abuse while they establish a sober support network, secure new employment, and find new housing. Residents stay for one to six months.

Residents of correctional transitional housing are frequently required to pay rent on a "sliding scale" which is often dependent on whether or not they can find a job while in residence (^[5]). In addiction recovery homes, a resident's stay is sometimes financed by their behavioral health insurance; although stay in a recovery home may be a partial requirement of a criminal sentence. Whereas at places labeled as recovery houses or sober houses for those with substance abuse problems, residents are only asked to remain sober and comply with a minimal recovery program. Residents pay for their own stay.

In certain areas, a Halfway House is much different than a Recovery House or Sober House. In these areas, a Drug and Alcohol Halfway House is licensed by the Department of Health and has staff coverage 24 hours a day. This staff includes a clinical treatment team.

United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom, halfway house usually refers to a place where people with mental disorders, victims of child abuse, orphans or teenage runaways can stay. The latter are often run by charities, including the Church of England and other churches, and community groups. Residential places for offenders on bail are known as bail hostels,^[6] and probation supervised accommodation for offenders post-release are known as Approved Premises.^[7] However, a halfway house more usually refers to something combining features of two other things, for example a solution to a problem based on two ideas.

Research on Halfway Houses

Since halfway houses are such a marginal topic in criminal justice, there is scant research on the subject.

Research into halfway houses usually focuses on one of two topics: 1) Programming Integrity or 2) N.I.M.B.Y. ("Not in my backyard") phenomena. With regard to programming integrity, findings regarding the ability of transitional housing to reduce recidivism or help addiction recovery have been mixed (^[8]).

Lowenkamp, Latessa and Holsinger (2006) have done extensive research of halfway house facilities that provide housing for low risk criminals serving remaining sentences while on probation or parole. Risk screening for residents is considered essential in order to preserve both institutional and community safety, although patterns of admission differ for each halfway house. As Lowenkamp, Latessa and Holsinger (2006) state: “for residential and nonresidential programs, adhering to the risk principle has a strong relationship with a program’s ability to reduce recidivism” (p.77).

N.I.M.B.Y Issues and Halfway House Siting

Social justice literature observes the relationships between halfway house siting and the NIMBY phenomena(^[9]; ^[10]). NIMBY is an acronym for: "Not In My Back Yard". It relates to the notion that some communities/neighborhoods have the ability to affect political legislation through political solidarity (^[11]).

Early research into NIMBY mostly observed community ability to organize and resist being sited for toxic waste dumping (^[12]), however the term has seen recent use in some corrections research. Schively (2007) points out that NIMBY responses are often inspired by the placement of facilities such as drug treatment centers, mental health facilities, detention centers, affordable housing, and homeless shelters that serve small sectors of the population (^[13]).

Piat's (2000) research stresses that community residents feel victimized by siting of halfway houses (Piat 2000). Others point out that the presence of transitional residences may pose direct and concrete hazards to community safety (Krause 1991). Reported among residents’ primary concerns are personal security (Rabkin, Muhlin, and Cohen 1984), declining property values (^[14]; ^[15]; ^[16]) and a general negative impact on neighborhood amenities and quality of life in the community (^[17]; ^[18]).

In N.I.M.B.Y. studies, neighborhood's resistance to placement is reported as bound with a certain degree of prejudice toward a certain class of people, namely ex-offenders and drug addicts (^[19]). Kraft and Clary (1991) argue that NIMBY responses are characterized by both "parochial and localized attitudes" toward the problem, which foster a distrust of project sponsors.

Recent Issues

As the economy lulls and there are less opportunities for traditional prison building. Halfway Houses are currently under debate in some parts of Chicago. (see: http://www.chicagonow.com/concerned-citizens-of-chatham/2011/12/are-halfway-houses-welcome-in-chatham/).

Kilburn and Costanza (2011) point out that the 2007 Petit Family Murders, in Cheshire, Ct., were specifically designed by 2 former convicts who met in a Connecticut halfway house.

See also

• Almshouse
• Deinstitutionalisation
• Hostel
• Poorhouse
• Sober living environment
• Types of drug rehabilitation treatment

References

1. ^ Piat 2000
2. ^ Cowan 2003
3. ^ Lowenkamp, Latessa and Holsinger 2006
4. ^ Kilburn and Costanza 2011
5. ^ Kilburn and Costanza 2011
6. ^ "Reid orders bail hostels review". BBC News. 7 November 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6123534.stm. Retrieved 2006-11-07. 
7. ^ Laycock, Mike (26 November 2009). "Children's charity Kidscape call for tighter controls on paedophiles living at York’s Southview probation hostel following Richard Graves case". YorkPress.co.uk. http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/4761014.Hostel_paedophiles_need_to_be_more_closely_monitored_____charity/. Retrieved 2009-12-06. 
8. ^ Lowenkamp, Latessa and Holsinger 2006
9. ^ Innes 1993
10. ^ Young 1998
11. ^ Kilburn and Costanza 2011
12. ^ Kraft and Clary 1991
13. ^ Schively 2007
14. ^ Dear 1977
15. ^ Farber 1986
16. ^ Myers and Bridges, 1995
17. ^ Baron and Piasecki 1981
18. ^ Eynon 1989
19. ^ Segal, Baumohl and Moyles 1980

Baron, R.C. and J.R. Piasecki. 1981. The community versus community care. New Directions for Mental Health Services. 11: 63-76.

Cowan, S. 2003. NIMBY syndrome and public consultation policy: The implications of a discourse analysis of local response to the establishment of a community mental health facility. Health and Social Care in the Community, 11: 379-386.

Dear, M. 1977. Psychiatric patients and the inner city. Annals of the Association f American Geographers. 67: 588-594.

Eynon, T. G. 1989. Building Community Support. Corrections Today. 51: 148, 150-2.

Innes, C.A. 1993. Recent public opinion in the United States toward punishment and corrections. The Prison Journal. 73: 220-36.

Kilburn, John C. and Costanza, S.E. 2011. Salvation City: Halfway House Stories, Teneo Press

Kraft, M.E. and Clary, B.B. 1991. Citizen participation and the NIMBY syndrome: public response to radioactive-waste disposal. The Western Political Quarterly, 44, 299-328.

Krause, J.D. 1991. “Community Opposition to Correctional Facility Siting: Beyond the “NIMBY” Explanation.” Humboldt Journal of Social Relations. 17: 239-262.

Lowenkamp, C.T., E.J. Latessa, and A.M. Holsinger. 2006. The risk principle in action: what have we learned from 13,676 offenders and 97 correctional programs? Crime & Delinquency 52: 77-93.

Piat, M. 2000. “Becoming the victim: A study on community reactions towards group homes.” Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal. 24(2): 108-116.

Schively, C. 2007. "Future Research Understanding the NIMBY and LULU Phenomena: Reassessing Our Knowledge Base and Informing Future Research" Journal of Planning Literature 21: 255-266.

Segal, S.P., J. Baumohl, and E. W. Moyles. 1980. Neighborhood types and community reaction to the mentally ill: A paradox of intensity. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 21: 345-59

Young, M. G.1998. Rethinking community resistance to a prison siting: Results from a community impact assessment. Canadian Journal of Criminology. 40: 323-8.

External links

• Directory of Halfway Houses in the United States
• [1]http://www.chicagonow.com/concerned-citizens-of-chatham/2011/12/are-halfway-houses-welcome-in-chatham/

This legal term article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. v d e