The Recidivism Cycle. Nick Schrock Meadow Ridge Dr. Berkey Avenue Mennonite Fellowship

Transcription

1 1 The Recidivism Cycle Nick Schrock Meadow Ridge Dr. Berkey Avenue Mennonite Fellowship Bethany Christian High School Grade 12

2 2 Recidivism in the United States has become a serious issue. According to a large study tracking state prisoners, 68% of released inmates were rearrested within three years, and 77% within five years (Cooper 4). It's difficult to compare data between countries, because different countries use different criteria to determine recidivism. However, approximate data suggests Australia's recidivism rate is about 39%, Japan's is 43%, the UK's is 46% (Deady 2), and Norway's is only 20% (Deady 3). America seems to have a higher rate than almost all other developed countries. Recidivism remains a large problem due to societal and governmental responses to former inmates; however, there are ways to accommodate people returning from prison that would reduce recidivism and align more closely with Anabaptist values. One of the most important actions a newly released prisoner can take is to find and keep a job. Employment status is a huge indicator of whether a former inmate will reoffend; after all, a steady job provides a source of income and stability to an individual's life and family ( Employment 45). Property offenders, such as burglars and robbers, are much more likely to reoffend than other prisoners, often because they have no other source of income (Cooper 8). Therefore, getting a job and gaining a legitimate revenue stream ought to help many of these people start new lives. Unfortunately, it can be very difficult for former inmates to find stable employment. Many employers simply aren't interested in the perceived gamble a criminal record represents. In a survey of employers, 60% said they performed background checks on every job applicant, primarily to find criminal records, and 71% said they avoided hiring an applicant if he or she had any criminal record at all. Justifiably or not, many people, including employers, are suspicious of ex-convicts, and while hiring a former embezzler to look after an organization's finances isn't the

3 3 best idea, there's no reason to categorically deny employment to someone because they were arrested once for minor drug possession in their teens ( Employment 45). Former inmates who are unable to find a job often have nowhere else to turn. Thanks to collateral consequence laws, ex-convicts are legally denied access to welfare, low-income housing, educational loans, and voting, among other benefits (Hubbard 1). These restrictions can essentially snatch the rug out from under ex-convicts' feet. They can't find a job because employers don't want to deal with them, they can't turn to the safety net to keep them on their feet, they can't find a government-subsidized house to live in, they can't take out a loan in order to go back to school and make themselves more desirable to potential employers, and they can't even vote for the politicians who could change these laws and give them a better shot at life. Homeless, hungry, and socially ostracized, it's no wonder that so many former inmates return to lives of crime. Sometimes, the only way to find enough money to survive is to go back to selling drugs, burglarizing homes, or robbing banks. These ex-prisoners may have started out with the intention of turning their lives around and doing things legally, but the law, and the society that created the law, has turned against them and forced them back into a cycle of crime and prison where everyone loses. Clearly, the problem of recidivism needs to be addressed and dealt with. The first and easiest way to reduce recidivism is to repeal collateral consequence laws, which make former inmates ineligible for welfare and other low-income support structures. These laws act as a barrier to people returning from prison, and encourage criminality among exconvicts by stripping them of legal paths to financial stability (Hubbard 1). Many proponents claim that these laws save money by reducing the number of welfare

4 4 and benefits recipients, and politicians certainly find it easy to point to the savings in defense of these laws. However, collateral consequences, by encouraging recidivism, end up costing large sums of money simply because they lead to larger numbers of people being incarcerated. Taxpayers ultimately foot the bill to keep prisons operational, and prisons aren't cheap. It costs approximately $30,000 per year to incarcerate one person. In 2010, the total cost of all prisons in the U.S. amounted to about $80 billion (Deady 2). Incarceration, and by extension recidivism, is expensive. Correctional education in prison is another way to prevent reincarceration. A three-state study of prisoners found that correctional education not only dramatically reduces recidivism, but also increases post-prison quality and stability of life (Smith 42). These programs can help prisoners develop personal skills such as anger management and addiction control. In addition, they allow inmates to earn high school and college level degrees, which can greatly improve their job prospects once they re-enter society. Another study of 6500 Indiana offenders revealed that inmates who complete GEDs in prison are 20% less likely to end up in prison again, while inmates completing college degrees are 44% less likely to return to prison ( Top-Nine 42). Clearly, education is important for post-prison prospects. Finally, it is important to approach the issue from the outside. Ex-convicts carry a social stigma; many people are suspicious of former inmates and want nothing to do with them. Regardless of whether this fear is justified, it ultimately results in fewer paths to proper reintegration and greater rates of recidivism, especially when it extends to employers. For this reason, ban-the-box campaigns propose to limit the employer's power in this situation. Under a ban-the-box law, employers wouldn't be able to ask applicants about criminal records until after

5 5 a job interview, and even then, employers wouldn't be allowed to deny an applicant due to their criminal record unless the crime is relevant to the job. For example, it's probably a good idea to keep a former child molester from working at a daycare center, but there's no reason that person can't work in a factory. A ban-the-box law would give former inmates a chance to start a new life, and prevent them from falling into poverty (Mosley 61). Unfortunately, the American public is unlikely to support these measures wholeheartedly. Prison is culturally understood to have two main purposes: it serves as a deterrent, and as a punishment. Serving time in prison is seen as a prisoner's way of paying back society for the damage he or she caused by breaking the law, and the sentence is supposed to discourage future illegal activity as well. In this cultural view, prison is looked upon favorably and seen as an important tool for preserving the peace; it's good, fair justice. Therefore, it's politically beneficial for politicians to appear tough on crime, and it's unlikely that many politicians will get elected by running on the promise of prison reform, especially since prison reform can represent a large upfront cost (Deady 5). However, this view of prison is somewhat inaccurate. For one, prison only benefits society insofar as it separates people exhibiting antisocial behavior from ordinary citizens. Serving time in prison doesn't pay back society; in fact, society pays the taxes that keep prisons running. Secondly, while prison may discourage many people from engaging in illegal activities to begin with, it also functionally closes most legal paths to financial stability for ex-convicts, and therefore unintentionally encourages illegal means of gaining wealth. Furthermore, this view of prison doesn't sit well with Anabaptist values. The idea of punishment is straight out of the doctrine of retributive justice; an eye for an eye. However,

6 6 trying to rehabilitate and resocialize criminals is much more effective than punishing them (Deady 4). Anabaptist morals tend to focus on restorative justice, working to repair the damaged relationship between criminals, their victims, and society as a whole. Unfortunately, the American prison system and society's response to former inmates do little to restore relationships. We don't work towards peaceful reconciliation with criminals; instead, we throw them in a harsh environment (prison) and then turn them loose in a world that is unforgiving of their sins and distrustful of how they will act. Instead of reaching out, we recoil. Instead of working with prisoners, we work against them. This response does not align with Anabaptist values, and it is ultimately unsuccessful and counter-productive. Recidivism is a serious problem in the United States, a problem exacerbated by governmental and societal responses to people returning from prison. There are ways to reduce recidivism, such as removing collateral consequences, instituting correctional education programs, and placing restrictions on hiring practices with regard to former inmates, but some of these measures aren't very popular with the public. Our typical response to people returning from prison is unhelpful, and inconsistent with Anabaptist values. We need to seriously rethink the way we approach justice as a whole if we want to work toward a fairer, more effective, and more relational system.

7 7 Works Cited Cooper, Alexia D., Ph.D, Matthew R. Durose, and Howard N. Snyder, Ph.D. "Recidivism Of Prisoners Released In 30 States In 2005: Patterns From 2005 To 2010." Bureau of Justice Statistics, 22 Apr Web. 30 Nov Deady, Carolyn W. "Incarceration and Recidivism: Lessons from Abroad." Pell Center, Mar Web. 30 Nov "Employment Challenges Faced By Former Inmates." Monthly Labor Review (2010): Readers' Guide Full Text Select (H.W. Wilson). Web. 19 Nov Hubbard, William C. "Bipartisan Efforts Seek To Reform Sentencing And Post-Conviction Policies." ABA Journal (2015): 1. Corporate ResourceNet. Web. 19 Nov MOSLEY, BILL. "Removing The Stigma Of Past Incarceration: "Ban The Box" Laws." New Politics 14.3 (2013): 60. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 19 Nov Steurer, Stephen J., et al. "The Top-Nine Reasons To Increase Correctional Education Programs." Corrections Today 72.4 (2010): 40. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 23 Nov Steurer, Stephen J., Ph.D, and Linda G. Smith, Ph.D. Education Reduces Crime, Three- State Recidivism Study. Correctional Education Association, n.d. Web. 30 Nov