Here you can read our free guide on the CMRJ-500 Week 7 Research Paper and its solution. No sign up required.
Instructions of CMRJ-500 Week 7 Research Paper and its solution
Instructions
Research Paper (20%)
Students are to write a 10 – 12 page research paper on an important ethical subject where they develop and ethics policy. In essence, you have the opportunity to solve an ethical dilemma on a grand scale. Students should identify an ethical topic they are interested in studying and create a policy and/or a recommendation to a state governing agency about how this ethical issue should be handled moving forward. Your choices should be fueled by empirical research and scholarly sources on the subject. This ethical issue will impact more than just your own individual self—it will affect the lives of all those across the state or even the country. Your job is to write a research paper for the state governor to use as the basis for his/her decision on this issue.
Â
As you write your paper, consider the moral rules that will support your decision.Â
General structure of your policy analysisÂ
1. Conduct a brief review/synopsis of the relevant facts.Â
2. Identify what you believe to be the major ethical issues and the relevant underlying values of each opposing side.Â
3. Set forth your recommendations for the continued use, modification, or discontinuation of this policy. Your decision must have some sort of rationale behind it. This is where you will present an answer to the policy issue at hand. Before you can do this, you will have to decide on what ethical system underlies your analysis. There is no right/wrong system of ethics—choose the one with which you most closely identify. If you are a utilitarian, your stance may be very different than if you identify with ethical formalism or an ethic of care. But, as we know from our class exercises, despite our different ethical systems, we may encounter the same results.Â
Some topic suggestions: (these are not required; just ideas for you to consider)Â
1. A policy of racial profiling by police officers to reduce and prevent crime on the streets.Â
2. The use of plea-bargaining for defendants charged with felonies.Â
3. The waiver of very young offenders (namely, “kids that kill”) to adult court and making them subject to adult processing and punishment.Â
4. The use of rehabilitation as the dominant model for corrections.Â
5. The use of restorative justice programs.Â
6. The use of “chain gangs,” “tent city,” and other novel punishments and how they impact prisoner rights.Â
7. Any other current criminal justice policy issue, if approved by me (the death penalty is not an option since we will be discussing this in class)Â
Â
Please adhere to these directives:
Organization:Â Title page, Abstract, Introduction, Body of the Paper, Conclusion.
The papers should have a brief introduction, appropriate transitions between topic areas, and a short conclusion. I am interested in each student’s ability to craft an organized approach to an ethical issue in criminal justice. Synthesize the literature on the subject and critically assess the ethical issue.
Substance: Each student should be able to craft a well-reasoned ethical argument. Since we will be addressing “hot” topics of current debate, emotions will run high. However, please try to support your argument with more than just emotion. Where appropriate, essays should draw from course readings, lectures, and discussions particular to the subject matter.Â
References:Â Consult at least five (5) outside peer reviewed sources to complete this assignment (the course readings do not count). Please consider the five-source requirement as establishing the baseline; students seeking higher grades are advised to broaden their research.Â
THESEÂ MUST BE PEER REVIEWED SOURCESÂ
APA citation is an absolute MUST!!
Criminal Justice Formal Written Paper Criteria | |||||
Quality of Response | No Response | Poor/Unsatisfactory | Satisfactory | Good | Excellent |
Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) | Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. | 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. | 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking.  | 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. | 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/ useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. |
Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points) | Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references OR the student failed to submit a final paper. | 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 7th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. | 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 7th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations, and/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. | 15 out 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 7th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations, and/or there is some use of questionable sources. | 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 7th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. |
Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) | Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. | 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors. |  10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization, and/or some grammatical, punctuation, spelling errors. | 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. | 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. |
Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) | Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. | 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 7th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 7thh edition requirements whatsoever. | 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 7th edition paper. The can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform with size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper. | 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font. Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. | 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 7th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12′ Times Roman Font. Additionally the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. |
Step-By-Step Guide CMRJ-500 Week 7 Research Paper
Introduction to CMRJ-500 Week Seven Research Paper
CMRJ-500 Week 7 Research Paper involves writing a 10–12-page research paper addressing a critical ethical issue in criminal justice and developing a corresponding ethics policy. The paper should be directed to a state governor, providing a comprehensive analysis and recommendations based on empirical research and scholarly sources. This CMRJ How-To Guide aims to solve an ethical dilemma with a broad societal impact supported by a well-reasoned ethical argument.
1. Conduct a brief review/synopsis of the relevant facts.Â
Conducting a Brief Review/Synopsis of Relevant Facts
To start the CMRJ-500 Week 7 Research Paper, we will conduct a brief review/synopsis of the relevant facts.
- Select an Ethical Topic: Choose an ethical issue in criminal justice that interests you and has significant implications at the state or national level.
- Research Thoroughly: Gather and review relevant facts about the issue. Use credible sources such as academic journals, government reports, and reputable news outlets.
- Summarize Key Points: Write a concise summary of the issue, including its background, current status, and pertinent data or statistics.
- Focus on Relevance: Ensure the facts you present are directly relevant to the ethical issue, providing a clear understanding of the context.
Example
Topic Selection: The Use of Solitary Confinement
Solitary confinement, also known as administrative segregation, involves isolating prisoners in a small cell for 22-24 hours a day, with minimal human contact and environmental stimulation. This practice has been a subject of intense debate due to its psychological effects and ethical implications.
Historical Context and Current Status
Solitary confinement has been used in U.S. prisons since the early 19th century, initially intended as a method for inmates to reflect on their crimes and reform. It was believed that isolation would encourage penitence and personal transformation, aligning with the reformative ideals of the penitentiary system (Stinneford, 2020). Over time, however, the use of solitary confinement has expanded significantly, now serving as a disciplinary measure for managing complex or dangerous prisoners who are deemed a threat to others or the prison environment. As of recent data, tens of thousands of inmates in the U.S. are held in solitary confinement, often for extended periods. This practice is applied for severe infractions and minor disciplinary issues, leading to widespread use (Wildeman & Andersen, 2020). The extended isolation can last weeks, months, or even years, raising serious ethical and psychological concerns about its impact on inmates’ mental health and well-being.
Empirical Evidence
Research consistently shows that prolonged solitary confinement has severe psychological effects on inmates. According to a 2019 report by the American Psychological Association, inmates in solitary confinement experience significantly higher rates of depression, anxiety, hallucinations, and suicidal behavior compared to those in the general prison population (Strong et al., 2020). The extreme isolation and sensory deprivation inherent in solitary confinement contribute to these adverse mental health outcomes. Studies have also found that the negative impacts of solitary confinement can persist long after inmates are released, making it difficult for them to reintegrate into society. Formerly isolated inmates often struggle with social interactions, maintain heightened levels of anxiety and depression, and face substantial barriers to employment and stable housing. (Wildeman & Andersen, 2020). These lasting psychological effects underscore the ethical concerns associated with solitary confinement and highlight the urgent need for reform to address the humane treatment of incarcerated individuals and support their successful reentry into the community.
Legal Framework and Controversies
Solitary confinement has been challenged on both legal and human rights grounds due to its severe psychological and physical impacts on inmates. The Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, has been central to numerous lawsuits arguing that prolonged solitary confinement violates this standard. Plaintiffs in these cases assert that extended isolation inflicts significant mental and physical suffering, amounting to inhumane treatment. Internationally, the United Nations Mandela Rules, a comprehensive set of guidelines for treating prisoners, explicitly state that prolonged solitary confinement, lasting more than 15 days, should be prohibited (Strong et al., 2020). The Mandela Rules recognize that such extended isolation can amount to torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. These international guidelines reflect a growing consensus that the practice is not only ethically indefensible but also legally questionable, prompting calls for reform in the United States and beyond to align with human rights standards.
2. Identify what you believe to be the significant ethical issues and the relevant underlying values of each opposing side.Â
Identifying Major Ethical Issues and Underlying Values
Next in CMRJ-500 Week 7 Research Paper, we will identify what we believe to be the significant ethical issues and the relevant underlying values of each opposing side.
- Identify Ethical Issues: Pinpoint the primary ethical dilemmas associated. Consider justice, fairness, human rights, and public safety.
- Analyze Opposing Sides: Examine the perspectives of different stakeholders involved. Identify the core values and principles that underpin each side’s arguments.
- Ethical Frameworks: Apply ethical frameworks to analyze these issues. Discuss how different moral theories (e.g., utilitarianism, deontological ethics, ethics of care) would approach the dilemmas.
- Balanced Presentation: Present a balanced view of the ethical issues, acknowledging the merits and drawbacks of each perspective.
Example
Identifying Ethical Issues
The primary ethical issue surrounding the use of solitary confinement is whether it can be justified, given its significant adverse effects on inmates’ mental health and overall well-being. This critical question encompasses several underlying ethical dilemmas that must be carefully considered. (Western, 2021). First, there are substantial human rights concerns, as prolonged isolation can be viewed as a form of psychological torture, violating the fundamental rights to dignity and humane treatment. Second, the principle of justice is at stake, as the use of solitary confinement often disproportionately affects marginalized and vulnerable populations, raising questions about fairness and equality within the criminal justice system. (Western, 2021). Additionally, the principle of humane treatment is central to this ethical debate. Solitary confinement’s severe psychological impacts—such as increased rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidal behavior—challenge the moral responsibility of the state to ensure the humane treatment of all individuals, regardless of their criminal status. These dilemmas underscore the need for ethical scrutiny and potential reform.
Human Rights and Dignity
Human rights are central to the ethical debate on solitary confinement, as this practice significantly impacts the fundamental rights and dignity of inmates. Prolonged isolation inflicts severe psychological harm, which includes increased rates of depression, anxiety, hallucinations, and suicidal behavior (Wildeman & Andersen, 2020). These adverse effects raise serious concerns about violating inmates’ fundamental human rights. According to international human rights standards, everyone has the right to be treated with dignity and respect, regardless of their legal status. Solitary confinement, significantly when extended beyond short durations, can be seen as a form of psychological torture (Gomes & Duarte, 2020). This view is supported by the United Nations Mandela Rules, which classify prolonged solitary confinement—defined as more than 15 days—as a form of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Such practices undermine the inherent dignity of the individual, contravening the ethical obligation of the state to ensure humane treatment. The psychological damage caused by solitary confinement often extends beyond the period of isolation, affecting inmates’ ability to reintegrate into society and maintain mental health (Western, 2021). This long-term impact highlights the need for a critical reevaluation of solitary confinement practices and the development of alternatives that uphold human rights and prioritize the mental well-being and dignity of inmates.
Justice and Rehabilitation
The justice system aims to punish and rehabilitate offenders, preparing them for successful reintegration into society. However, the use of solitary confinement significantly impedes this rehabilitative goal (Haney, 2020). Prolonged isolation exacerbates mental health issues, such as depression, anxiety, and hallucinations, which can persist long after inmates are released. These psychological impacts make it more challenging for former inmates to reintegrate into society, maintain employment, and build healthy relationships. This failure to facilitate successful reentry raises serious ethical concerns about the justice system’s responsibility towards rehabilitation.
Ethically, the justice system must provide conditions that promote the rehabilitation and reintegration of inmates. Solitary confinement, by its nature, contradicts this responsibility. It removes inmates from social interaction and meaningful activities, which are essential for mental health and rehabilitation (Wildeman & Andersen, 2020). The lack of access to educational and vocational programs, coupled with the psychological torment of isolation, hinders inmates’ ability to develop skills and coping mechanisms needed for life outside prison. Moreover, the stigmatization and psychological damage caused by solitary confinement often leads to higher recidivism rates, perpetuating a cycle of incarceration rather than breaking it (Gomes & Duarte, 2020). Therefore, the ethical mandate to rehabilitate offenders necessitates the reevaluation and reduction of solitary confinement practices in favor of more humane and effective alternatives.
Safety and Order
Proponents of solitary confinement argue that it is a necessary tool for maintaining safety and order within prisons (Stinneford, 2020). They claim that it is an effective means to manage inmates who pose a significant threat to others or themselves, preventing violence and ensuring the facility’s security. By isolating those who exhibit violent or disruptive behavior, prison authorities believe they can protect both staff and other inmates from harm, thus maintaining a controlled environment.
However, solitary confinement must be balanced against the ethical obligation to treat all individuals humanely, regardless of their behavior (Haney, 2020). Prolonged isolation can cause severe psychological harm, including depression, anxiety, hallucinations, and suicidal tendencies. These effects challenge the ethical principles of human rights and dignity enshrined in domestic and international laws. The United Nations Mandela Rules explicitly state that prolonged solitary confinement, defined as more than 15 days, amounts to torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment (Western, 2021).
Moreover, the ethical implications extend beyond immediate psychological harm. The conditions of solitary confinement, characterized by extreme isolation and sensory deprivation, can exacerbate the very behaviors it seeks to control (Strong et al., 2020). Inmates subjected to prolonged isolation often struggle with reintegration into the general prison population and society upon release, undermining the rehabilitative goals of the justice system. Therefore, while maintaining safety and order is essential, finding a balance that ensures humane treatment, adheres to ethical standards, and promotes the overall well-being and rehabilitation of inmates is crucial.
Underlying Values of Opposing Sides
Safety and Order: Belief that solitary confinement is essential for maintaining prison security and order.
Disciplinary Tool: View that it serves as a necessary disciplinary measure for managing violent or uncooperative inmates.
Protection: Argument that it can protect vulnerable inmates from harm by isolating them from the general population.
Human Rights: Emphasis on the violation of human rights and the psychological torture inflicted by prolonged isolation.
Mental Health: Concern over the severe and long-lasting mental health impacts on inmates.
- Rehabilitation: Argument that it hinders rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
3. Set forth your recommendations for this policy’s continued use, modification, or discontinuation.
Setting Forth Recommendations
Next in CMRJ-500 Week 7 Research Paper, We will recommend this policy’s continued use, modification, or discontinuation here.
- Develop Recommendations: Based on your analysis, decide whether the policy should be continued, modified, or discontinued.
- Rationale: Provide a clear rationale for your decision. Explain the ethical principles and empirical evidence that support your recommendations.
- Ethical System: Identify and explain the ethical system that underlies your analysis. Whether you align with utilitarianism, ethical formalism, or another theory, ensure your stance is well-articulated and justified.
- Practical Implications: Discuss the practical implications of your recommendations. Consider how they will affect various stakeholders and the broader community.
Example
Ethical Framework
The ethical framework guiding these recommendations is primarily based on human rights and the principle of humane treatment. This framework emphasizes the moral duty to ensure that all individuals, including inmates, are treated with dignity and respect. It highlights the necessity of upholding fundamental human rights standards, preventing cruel treatment, and ensuring that the conditions within prisons support the physical and mental well-being of inmates. By adhering to this ethical framework, the proposed recommendations aim to create a more just and humane correctional system that prioritizes rehabilitation and respects the inherent dignity of every person.
Recommendation 1: Limiting the Use of Solitary Confinement
It is recommended that the state implement strict limits on solitary confinement, reflecting a commitment to ethical treatment and human rights standards (Gomes & Duarte, 2020). To begin with, solitary confinement should be prohibited entirely for vulnerable populations, including juveniles, pregnant women, and individuals with mental illnesses. These groups are particularly susceptible to the severe psychological harm caused by isolation, and their protection should be a priority within the correctional system. This recommendation is supported by extensive research showing that solitary confinement can exacerbate existing mental health conditions and cause significant long-term harm (Wildeman & Andersen, 2020).
Furthermore, for the general inmate population, solitary confinement should be strictly limited to no more than 15 consecutive days. This guideline aligns with the United Nations Mandela Rules, which classify prolonged solitary confinement as torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. By adhering to this limit, the state would comply with international human rights standards, reducing the risk of psychological harm to inmates.
Implementing these restrictions is a matter of legal and human rights compliance and an ethical obligation. Ensuring the humane treatment of inmates upholds their dignity and well-being is a fundamental principle that should guide correctional policies. The justice system has a moral duty to treat all individuals, including those incarcerated, with respect and compassion. This ethical stance reinforces the notion that punishment should not involve inhumane treatment and that the state has a responsibility to safeguard the mental and physical health of all inmates.
Moreover, the recommendation to limit solitary confinement is grounded in empirical evidence. Research consistently demonstrates that prolonged solitary confinement leads to severe negative impacts, such as depression, anxiety, hallucinations, and suicidal behavior. These psychological effects can persist long after the period of isolation has ended, making it difficult for former inmates to reintegrate into society and increasing the likelihood of recidivism. By implementing these restrictions, the state can mitigate these adverse outcomes and promote a more rehabilitative approach to incarceration.
The state should adopt strict limits on the use of solitary confinement to protect vulnerable populations, comply with international human rights standards, and fulfill its ethical obligations. Limiting solitary confinement to 15 days for the general inmate population and prohibiting its use for particularly vulnerable groups will help ensure the humane treatment of all inmates and align correctional practices with ethical and legal standards.
Closing
The CMRJ-500 Week 7 Research Paper requires a deep engagement with an ethical issue in criminal justice, demanding thorough research, critical analysis, and well-supported recommendations. Following this Owlisdom How-To Guide, you can develop a comprehensive and persuasive research paper that addresses complex ethical dilemmas and proposes thoughtful, evidence-based solutions. The critical takeaway is to balance ethical reasoning with empirical research to craft a principled and practical policy. In the Upcoming module of CMRJ, we will explore Controlling Misconduct, Best Practices.
References
Gomes, S., & Duarte, V. (2020). What about ethics? Developing qualitative research in confinement settings. European Journal of Criminology, 17(4), 461–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370818801305
Haney, C. (2020). The Science of Solitary: Expanding the Harmfulness Narrative. Northwestern University Law Review, pp. 115, 211.
Stinneford, J. F. (2020). Is Solitary Confinement a Punishment? Northwestern University Law Review, 115, 9.
Strong, J. D., Reiter, K., Gonzalez, G., Tublitz, R., Augustine, D., Barragan, M., Chesnut, K., Dashtgard, P., Pifer, N., & Blair, T. R. (2020). The body in isolation: The physical health impacts of incarceration in solitary confinement. PLOS ONE, 15(10), e0238510. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0238510
Western, B. (2021). Inside the Box: Safety, Health, and Isolation in Prison. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 35(4), 97–122. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.35.4.97
Wildeman, C., & Andersen, L. H. (2020). Solitary confinement placement and post-release mortality risk among formerly incarcerated individuals: A population-based study. The Lancet Public Health, 5(2), e107–e113. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(19)30271-3
