Personally I feel it depends on the crime in which inmates should be rehabilitated.Fir instance if it’s minor crimes like house breaking,fraud and assault to cause bodily harm then those individuals can be in a programme for rehabilitation.The programme should be educational based and evaluations should be made.On the other hand for serious crimes that include sexual assault,murder and robbery those responsible should be assessed and root cause be established whether it’s mental illness,childhood trauma and substance abuse. If assessments present that it was unintentional then they can be rehabilitated.For those who did it intentionally long prison sentences should continue.
Research has shown that seldom rehabilitative measures do work as those who are released after serving their sentences continue to do crimes.I believe it’s up to an individual to change their behaviour.The other problem could be most inmates are given a hard time while serving their sentences and are bullied even abused while detained,it seems it will be difficult for them to move on from what happens while they’re in prison.Families of the victims and the people that experienced crimes committed to them might feel that the justice system is not serving well so it’s a difficult situation to navigate and maintain a balance.Some cases hit hard on the tax payers so to detain them then later release them is a waste of money to the taxpayers.
In conclusion I think it t depends on the crimes committed to determine rehabilitation or for jail sentences to be served.People should be treated as individuals and to not be linient on everyone.