Several people affect the behaviors of the inmates. The effects come from the people who are so close to the prisoners as well as those who do not directly affect the internal affairs of the prisons. Some of the stakeholders include the parole officers, police, the defense attorneys, prosecutors, the judges, local governments, prison management, offenders, victim advocates as well as the private organizations. These stakeholders can directly or indirectly affect the state of the prisons. Some of the stakeholders cannot control the internal affairs of the prisons as the judges, the prosecutors, and the defense attorneys while the police and staff are directly linked with the internal affairs. Violence in prisons can be controlled directly or indirectly by these stakeholders. The cases of the inmates must at any point be checked by these stakeholders and the general prison as a whole. The collective responsibilities of the stakeholders can bring some noticeable effects to the prisoners .
The most immediate internal stakeholders are the prison staffs who tend to control all the activities taking place in these prisons. The manipulation of the inmates’ organization and the chances of violence reduction depend on the capability of the staff to handle the prisoners with a lot of care. Officers affect the prison affairs in several ways, and the choice of whether to engage in violence or not to engage is in the staff control. Having inexperienced staff to manage the affairs of the prisoners and to deal with them directly infuriates the inmates. At times, some of the inmates are accused wrongly by the relevant staff and the punishment becomes so severe. Considering the state of mind and the psychological preparedness, the inmates may decide to retaliate leading to several other effects

You're lucky! Use promo "samples20"
and get a custom paper on
"Internal and External Stakeholders In Prisons"
with 20% discount!
Order Now

Prison management treats the prisoners with less care. The manner in which the prisoners are handled, random selection of cell mates and using the inmates for all the other wrong reasons lead to psychological torture. Most of the inmates attack other inmates because of some petty reasons. The violence is not the issue to them, but the reasons, why they have to be violent, is the issue. The relationship between the cell mates should be considered, and an avid surveillance on the interests of the inmates be handled to reduce violence. Cameras do not give the full view of the cells, and these are the breeding points of violence. Having secret cameras at some strategic points to help in the improvement of surveillance is an issue that the managements do not consider. Giving the inmates a chance to make deals and failing to monitor them properly during their free times is a weakness on the staff side. Several cases of prison escapes have been reported over the past years, and the cases still reported to date. Most of these escapes start with violence. This gives an impression that there is a possibility of weakness that the staff assumes over the years .

The prisoners’ close relations and the victims mostly affect the situations negatively. Some of the victims use the prisoners for their personal gain. They manipulate the situations in a quest to take control of other circumstances. Some cases have been observed where the victims give inmates some conditions for them to be excused. Most of these conditions revolve around punishing a fellow inmate or even killing them. The victims use these prisoners to make sure that they achieve what they want. Other stakeholders such the private organizations like churches tend to reduce the rate of violence, and this gives a positive result. Some inmates follow these words and they learn to live in harmony with the others while some of them keep on getting irritated and keep on being violent. Both the external and the internal stakeholders have a part to play whether positive or negative .

In coming up with an antidote to this menace, the stakeholders must be included in every plan for it to work. Training the staff on how to handle the inmates is the first step to ensuring success. Understanding the fact that the inmates have different crimes and their attitudes are not similar to all the rest is salient. The victims, defense attorneys, and the prosecutor must be educated on how to reduce the psychological torture before the cases are sealed. Involving the stakeholders in coming up with proper plans will reduce the violence rates by a good percentage. Enabling the prisoners to engage in different activities and reducing the chances that they may come into contact by involving the independent organizations such as churches and social organizations can reduce the violence rate. This brings the salient roles that the stakeholders may play in curbing the most experienced challenge in prisons. Ensuring that the stakeholders play their roles without favoritism increases the chances to solution .

Buying an idea to solve an issue is a challenge since most of the cases, the idea must be scrutinized. Motivating people to buy this idea can be done by engaging them in coming up with their thoughts, sharing some of the information with the inmates and asking if they can live comfortably with the proposals. Explaining to the inmates the advantages and helping them understand the need for new policies can assists in motivating them. Winning the loyalty of the inmates is the easiest way of convincing all the rest of the validity of the idea. Motivating the stakeholders and the inmates can equally be done by involving the government in the solution. The direct beneficiary of the reduction of violence is the government, and this can result in proper funding for training and fair policies for the inmates.

    References
  • Hanoch, Y., & Gummerum, M. (2011). A comparison of the risk-taking behaviors of prisoners and non-prisoners. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 24.
  • Kakoullis, A., Le Mesurier, N., & Kingston, P. (2010). The mental health of older prisoners. International Psychogeriatrics / IPA, 22, 600–701.
  • Khadjavi, M., & Lange, A. (2013). Prisoners and their dilemma. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 92, 127–175.