Imagine you are standing on the street in any city, U.S.A.,
and 590,400 people emerge from the office building just behind you, tumbling
over themselves, trampling others, all of them reaching out their hands to you
and trying to get your attention. Some of them are asking for a place to stay,
help with finding a job, assistance in reuniting with their family members. Do
you run? Are you able to run? How can you keep ahead of this massive wave of
people, all clamoring for help? Maybe you disappear down an alley or into
another building, therefore escaping the tide of 590,400 people who need your
help. How can you be expected to help them all? This is the plight of the all
prisoners released from the penal system into society in 2013 in the United
States, as well as the plight of nonprofits and other governmental agencies
attempting to help them re-assimilate into society.
Nathan James (2014) is an Analyst in
Crime Policy for the Congressional Research Service, which informs legislators
in Congress. His 2014 report on ex-convict re-entry into the community and
recidivism states that “almost five million ex-offenders are under some form of
community-based supervision” currently. The numbers are overwhelming, the
resources very limited, and the results are not encouraging. Something must be
done to help ex-convict become productive members of society once their
sentences have been served and they are released. James’ report was prepared
for members of Congress, to inform them of the specific issues in this area
today. James notes that nearly two-thirds of all 2005 ex-offenders participated
in recidivism, and more than half returned to prison (2014). Three offender
reentry phases are emphasized in James’ report: programs during incarceration,
programs during offender release period, and long-term permanent reintegration
programs. Public policy-makers and the public at large are pressured under the
constantly growing wave of ex-offenders in society today, and must make rapid decisions
to avoid exacerbation of the problem.
James indicates that the multiple
definitions of recidivism are a barrier to these decisions and procedures,
preventing categorization of ex-offenders into continuous offenders and those
who simply cannot meet the extensive financial requirements of their probations.
Shivy, et al. studied different groups of ex-offenders in an attempt to
determine the different issues and requirements of each group when reentering
the workforce, and thus society (Shivy, Wu, Moon, Mann, Holland, &
Eacho, 2007). The findings in this article suggest that counseling services and
professionals need to focus specifically on “ex-offenders’ social networks,
including social aspects of the workplace…as they can present a liability or support
for career-related reentry attempts” (p. 466). The study also indicated the
importance of internal and external impacts of incarceration stigmas on
ex-offenders, concluding that education, training, and practical assistance in
obtaining and maintaining a job are the primary support services ex-offenders
need to reintegrate into society after prison release (p. 466).
Ex-offenders are released from prison
into the outside world to find an environment that is very different from the
one inside the prison. Shelter, food, and income are not issues in prison, they
are provided freely by the institutions. The outside world is very different,
and requires adjustment to a society and social norms in education, procedures,
and intercommunication that is often very different from the outside world the
prisoners last experienced. The only way to successfully reintegrate these
ex-offenders into society and avoid extensive recidivism is to provide them
with the tools to succeed, through education, career, and the basic features
and requirements of the environment to which they are being released.
James, N. (2014). Offender Reenty: Correctional Statistics,
Reintegration into the Community, and Recidivism. Congressional Research
Service. Retrieved from http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34287.pdf
Shivy,V.A., Wu, J.J., Moon, A.E., Mann, S.C., Holland, J.G.,
and Eacho, C. (2007). Ex-offenders reentering the workforce. Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 54(4),
p. 466-473.
I like your posts starting with the stories to put the rest of the post into perspective. I think it really helps drive home the point that you're making and you pull it off really well. It would seem that recidivism is common because basic human necessities are provided "free of charge" in a sense, and that many criminals are aware of the bleak job prospects so they basically volunteer to go back. As such, do you think there is any way to stop that from happening without making prisons such a terrible place that going back is simply not an option? I personally think the prison system actually needs to be even nicer and focus on rehabilitation instead of punishment, that way future employers can be confident that even individuals that have been incarcerated in the past have come out the other side better.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point Lou - I'm really hoping that becomes the case.
DeleteThis is a great post John. You did a great job discussing the study and the results found. It’s crazy to hear how many ex-convicts were released that year, but I think it’s crazier to know that the US lacks the proper resources to help ex-convicts. Sadly because of the stigma and lack of resources given to convicts, many of them return to prison. I think if the US were able to create more programs to assist ex-convicts there would be a decrease number. If would be interesting to see the kind of positive effects there would be if better programs were provided.
ReplyDeleteWell said Cristina, I couldn't agree more!
DeleteThe main thing that I really enjoy about this post is the simple fact that you used specific details in it. It really allowed me to visualize what you were saying which allowed the post to be a lot more interesting. I can actually picture myself doing what you said in the beginning of this post and it is so true. This is a great post and I really do suggest that everyone read this. You were able to clearly explain what you were talking about and this really helps us as viewers to read and take in what is being read through out the post.
ReplyDeleteAppreciate that Warren - thank you!!
DeleteI agree with the point about therapy focusing on social networks, particularly at work and I think that therapy should teach ex-offenders how to create these social networks at work and elsewhere because it can be hard to make associations with people outside of your neighborhood or criminal activity. I also agree with the point about terms used in legislation to categorize offenders into repeat or continuous offenders. There are some laws like the three strikes rule that severely punish repeat offenders. This is clearly no solution. I also enjoyed your first person view. The study pointed out the impact of stigma on obtaining a job. I think it is very hard for ex-offenders to be hired but I also believe there is a self-fulfilling prophecy in the way people interact with ex-offenders. They may treat them with hostility or coldness, there for inciting that same behavior in the ex-offenders and then confirming their already held beliefs about the nature of “criminals”. What is the most cost-efficient solution that you have encountered thus far?
ReplyDeleteIt's hard when people judge you before they even meet you and that's what most of these employers do; it's pretty sad. I haven't come across any cost-efficient solution yet but I'm definitely looking.
DeleteThanks for your comment!
Interesting post. I like how you explain the article with clarity which makes it was to read and understand. I didn’t read your previous blogs yet I was able to understand since your explanation was well written. The use of statistics help in understanding the result of the study. I was kind of surprised to know that half of the ex-offenders participated in recidivism ended back in prison. I really enjoyed reading your post.
ReplyDeleteThank you Ayesha, I'm glad you were able to read and understand the blog. Although, if you happen to have a minute, I'll suggest you read my other blogs as well. I'll like to know what you think.
DeleteThank you!
Interesting post John, it is important for policy makers to revisit the aspect of criminal justice system. People because of bad environment surround them and lack of alternative means, they practice drugs and ruin their life without having the opportunity to understand the consequences or better alternatives that available to them. Resources that is used to keep them in prison cell can be used for consulting, training, as well as for job hunts. Doing the same thing in regard to drug crimes and expecting different result seems unwise, economically unproductive, and costly to the society and need immediate attention regarding those inmates released from prison.
ReplyDeleteI think the best way to describe the current measures that are in place to re-assimilate ex-offenders back into study is that of putting a bandage on a wound that actually requires stiches. Currently we are operating on a bandage level where we simply do not have enough resources to implement significant change. In addition to this barrier, company background check processes are in place primarily to rule out hiring such offenders. I feel a good support system and a decent job will give the ex-offender a sense of connection with the rest of society. Having a job will do wonders for them and I think will prevent some of them from re-offending. But if they are coming out with no job prospects, poor housing options, and a target on their back that labels them a criminal – it can lead the most sane and rational thinker to go back to their old ways. Great post!
ReplyDeleteI remember watching a Fresh Prince of Bel Air episode where Will goes in to help uncle Phil when he is handling a case and an ex con comes in with the inability to find a job. Uncle Phil tells him he has to find one or he will go back to jail (since he is on probation) then Will comes up with the idea that they should hire him to fix stuff around the house. The point is at first uncle Phil was against the idea because he was an ex con even after saying he deserved a chance but he gave him a shot anyway. There are not people who can deal with reemerging into society as well as others especially with no help.
ReplyDelete