The journey from there to here
Published on August 11, 2004 By Gideon MacLeish In Misc
I have been meaning to write a blog on penal reform for a long time. This article will only touch on some of my feelings, and I will write more in depth later.

One of the key problems with our penal system in America is that it is largely revenge based, rather than rehabilitation based. We think that, by removing the criminal from society, by executing them or demeaning them, we are somehow "dealing with" the crime problem in this country. The fact is, that is just not the case. We are "dealing with" the crime problem in this country in the same way that giving aspirin for the headaches of a brain cancer patient is "dealing with" cancer. We are dealing with a few of the symptoms, to the exclusion of others.

The first thing that needs to be done for meaningful penal reform to take place is a better system of sorting out the inmates. Clearly, there are some individuals who should never see the light of day again, and these people, in my opinion, should be separated from the criminals who will eventually be released. I will not address the former group here, but the latter category of criminals should be part of an aggressive, ongoing attempt to reintegrate them into society. The fact that they WILL be released means, you have two choices: release a prisoner to reoffend, then churn them back through the system, or progressively work towards the rehabilitation of the incarcerated criminal. The second option is the clear choice for a stable, safe society, and yet it is the most often ignored.

What I see as a viable, workable system would go something like this: During the first two weeks of your incarceration, you have NO privileges. You have the basic rights (food, shelter, chapel, reading materials, access to hygiene facilities, etc), but nothing beyond the basics. At the end of the two weeks you have the option of working within the system. If you choose not to work, fine, but your status remains the same. If you choose to work, you begin to earn privileges. A portion of your wage goes to offset the cost of your incarceration, but a portion of your wage is discretionary, with only reasonable barriers as to what you may or may not buy. You may then earn your way up through the system, earning furloughs and trips into the community at the highest levels (this IS about rehabilitation, remember?). The idea is that, once released, you have some clue as to the work/rewards system that many of us enjoy, and you have some concept of what it means to be a productive system.

This is a thread I will continue further on future articles.

signing off,

Gideon MacLeish

Comments
on Aug 12, 2004
I think you have a good idea except for the "first two weeks" art. Way, way to short! It should be at least 2 years. The few (and I do mean few!) successful ones that I have seen is because they just plain old got sick of lock up. It seems it takes a few years for some people to remember who they are.
on Aug 12, 2004
I think you have a good idea except for the "first two weeks" art. Way, way to short! It should be at least 2 years. The few (and I do mean few!) successful ones that I have seen is because they just plain old got sick of lock up. It seems it takes a few years for some people to remember who they are.


Actually, the idea is, after the first two weeks, they only get out if they work. The honest truth is, a good number of prisoners would still remain in lockup because they don't want to work ("I ain't workin' for tha MAN").
on Aug 12, 2004
Gideon: As always, I enjoy reading your thoughts. I'm really not sure where I stand on this issue, although your plan sounds reasonable. I do agree that we must work towards making them ready to enter the world where they will be expected to make a living (and hopefully a life) for themselves. Great post.
on Aug 12, 2004
The concept you propose is in place in many, if not most state penal systems. Since the federal system does not, by Congressional mandate, allow good time, there really is no incentive for the progressive award of privileges that you suggest. There are some flaws in any system of graduated awarding of privileges, as exemplified in the 2002 Supreme Court ruling in McCune v. Lile. This case out of Kansas concerned a prisoner convicted of kidnapping and raping a 17-year old young woman some 15 or more years prior. He was still appealing the conviction. He had earned privileges--better housing unit, private tv he was allowed to purchase, more visitors, gym privileges, etc. Then Kansas put in place a requirement that convicted sex offenders participate in group therapy, and admit prior, unprosecuted sex crimes and transgressions, for which they would receive no immunity. Lile refused, based on the fear of being prosecuted. Also, he felt that the program would require him to admit to the rape, which he had always denied. His privileges were removed and he went back to a situation a new inmate would be in.
The Supreme Court ruled that the Kansas prison system had the right to punish Lile in this fashion.
Since most programs like A&D or sex offender therapy happen soon before release, is it fair to compel participation contigent upon retention of privileges?
on Aug 12, 2004
You may be on to something there Gideon....I agree that these prisoners should be rehabilitated instead of being only punished....maybe you should propose this little idea to the government?....

Very Nice,
~Zoo
on Aug 12, 2004

During the first two weeks of your incarceration, you have NO privileges. You have the basic rights (food, shelter, chapel, reading materials, access to hygiene facilities, etc), but nothing beyond the basics. At the end of the two weeks you have the option of working within the system. If you choose not to work, fine, but your status remains the same. If you choose to work, you begin to earn privileges


That's the way Dave ran the jail on base when he was NCO In Charge, except he couldn't keep the prisoners in solitary for 2 weeks.  He had them in solitary for 2 - 4 days, and during that time they weren't allowed any visitors, no TV, no coming out for meals, and the only reading materials they were allowed to have were a bible and the confinement facility rule book. They were escorted from the cell once a day for a shower.  The only furniture in the cell is a bed, a chair and a toilet.  They're not allowed to sit or lay on the bed during the day, they had to sit on the chair.  After the 48 hours is up they're asked if they want to join to rest of the prison population, and work release is always an option. 


 

on Aug 12, 2004
zoologist,

I've all but given up on anyone affiliated with the Democrat or Republican parties as far as meaningful reform goes. I have suggested it to the Libertarians with whom I associate, and have had it considered as part of their platforms.