Recommendations to Hillary Clinton Regarding Prisoner Re-Entry into Society
Prisoner re-entry is a vitally important issue today which has yet to reach its full impact on the minds and lives of voters. However, with every passing year the importance of this topic becomes more evident. Since the eighties, every passing year has brought more pressure for harsher and longer imprisonment and more streamlined mandatory sentencing rules. This has not only resulted in an exploding prison population, but also in a drastic increase in the number of prisoners re-released into communities. Additionally, the push towards more punitive measures has decreased educational opportunities in prisons and the availability of rehabilitation programs. This means that released prisoners are increasingly unable to reintegrate into their communities, increasingly prone to recidivism, and increasingly violent in each release and re-capture cycle. Even the conservative Bush administration has recognized the threat posed by unprepared prisoner re-entry and responded with a series of grants to private and public organizations involved in rehabilitation and easing prisoner transitions. However, merely making government money available to private, religious, or state-based programs is not enough. These funds are only likely to reach
a minority of prisoners who are already being aided by the aided programs. Prisoners whose communities and systems do not already take measures to help their rehabilitation will not be seeing any increase in re-entry programs or preparation. A nationwide set of standards is needed to assure that every prisoner eligible for re-release into the community will be inoculated against recidivism and prepared to become a useful part of the society in which they will reside. It is time for the Democratic Party to back away from the conservative model of crime prevention through fear and towards social responsible model of crime prevention through the creation of healthy communities. This can be done in large part by reforming the prison system from a gulag of social control and intimidation into a truly educational experience in which prisoners are put on a moderated track towards social responsibility, respect for the rights of others, and preparation to take a beneficial role in society. These suggestions represent the best Democratic policy towards reform of the prisoner re-entry system. Petersilia's book on the subject provides documentation about the efficacy of these recommendations and their necessity in the current environment. The remainder of this paper will focus on the precise laws, policies, and programs which may be recommended to promote the implementations of these suggestions. 3. Mandatory counseling and AIDS testing for all prison brutality victims and the establishment of victim-positive protective custody arrangements. (Many victimized inmates are only offered solitary confinement as a protective arrangement, which generally means loss of other privileges and any human interaction, potentially worsening the trauma and decreasing reports) Condoms and retro-virus treatment should be made available to all AIDS/HIV positive inmates, so that future consensual prison relationships will be less likely to increase AIDS transmission. Petersilia's third point is that we need extensive post-release services. A new set of federal guidelines should require all released prisoners to be prepared with housing and income options. Halfway housing should be arranged for those who do not have families prepared to commit to providing housing. Job-placement services should be arranged before release and continued employment should be a condition of parole with job-placement provided at any point during the parole period at which the ex-inmate becomes unemployed. Continued medical treatment and counseling for prison-related problems (including AIDS and mental illness) should be provided, as well as mandatory counseling and guidance sessions. More federal and state funding needs to be available to increase the number of parole officers and services. Nationwide there is a shortage in parole officers. In California, for example, "the ratio is now 82 parolees to 1 parole officer... even parolees who are motivated to change have little opportunity to do so." (Petersilia, "Challenges..." ) According to Petersilia's research, "most inmates have a strong desire to succeed when they are first released." (Petersilia, "Challenges...") Therefore it is vital that re-entry services are provided. Additionally, as most inmates are re-arrested within three years, it seems vital that such services are available for a period of at least five years as the inmates adjust to the responsibility and freedom of life outside. Homelessness, lack of income and opportunities, and a return to addiction are among the main reasons for a return to crime -- proper post-release supervision, counseling, and provision of housing and work opportunities can prevent this. Though such supervisio
Some common words found in the essay are:
NYPD Blue, Prisoner Reentry, Pell Grants, , Prevention Bill, Parole California, Communities Culture, Petersilia Challenges, National Commission, Democratic Party, prison rape, prison system, release requirements, prisoner re-entry, parole release, national guidelines, prison population, change prison, personal choice, mandatory counseling, model crime prevention, change prison release, alter in-prison experience, release revocation practices, prison rape brutality,
Approximate Word count = 2496
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
