Natalie Lejeune Project 103 11/12/2017 Does Prison Work?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LeJeune1 Natalie LeJeune Project 103 11/12/2017 Does Prison Work? For many Americans, TV dramas are the only even vague insight to prisons. Citizens see cops as tragic protagonists struggling with their own demons. TV inmates are either villains or are truly innocent. However, the reality isn’t quite so black and white. The process of prison around the world is highly dynamic and contains layers upon layers of catastrophic dilemmas and harrowing perspectives. It is no question that the system has failed many and benefited others. Particularly, two developed world nations contain two vastly different systems. In order to compare and contrast them, it is important to know the statistics, processes, and perspectives from each system. There are several primary objectives that make up the prison pie: retribution, incapacitation, deterrence and rehabilitation. Each piece is essential and contributes vitally to the big idea. However, some aspects of the system get lost or forgotten in certain areas. Depending on how much an individual prison values a certain objective, money is poured respectively in that area. Systems that hold one value over the other will hire more personnel and spend more on resources relating to that objective; for example, a prison that places rehabilitation over all else may spend more on hiring respected psychologists and setting up college prison programs. When one aspect is focused on too much, aspects of the system may fall apart or problems will arise. Retribution can be easily described as justice; what do the criminals deserve for their crimes? In more archaic times, retribution was the sole purpose of prison and could be more accurately described as punishment. For example, in ancient LeJeune2 Mesopotamia, the Code of Hammurabi governed the principle of “an eye for an eye,” the notion that each offender should be dealt exactly their crime back to them with varying degrees of harshness dependant on your societal status. However, modern society has seemingly moved away from this presumed dated way of reasoning. Every offender in the United States gets treated the same way, right? It has to be; this principle is the very basis of the equal land of opportunity. Incapacitation is the basic notion that because the threats to society are locked up, they cannot cause further damage. Many argue that the current prison system works simply because of this principle; the removal of prisoners from society obviously prohibits them from committing further crimes. However, as with all objectives of prison, incapacitation has its issues. As stated by The Encyclopedia of Prisons and Correctional Facilities, “So, according to this theory, punishment is not concerned with the nature of the offender, as is the case with rehabilitation, or with the nature of the offense, as is the case with retribution. Rather, punishment is justified by the risk individuals are believed to pose to society in the future. As a result, individuals can be punished for “hypothetical” crimes. In other words, they can be incarcerated, not for crimes they have actually committed but for crimes it is anticipated or assumed they will commit.” Incapacitation only “works” for the duration of a sentence. If a prisoner is presumed to be a further threat to society, the sentence can be continuously extended. This doctrine is primarily what causes life sentences, and can leave someone locked away for the duration of their time on earth. LeJeune3 While the idea behind deterrence is similar to incapacitation, it is strategically used as a very different method. This notion can be summarized by the TV documentary Scared Straight, in which delinquent juveniles are forced to tour harsh United States prisons and get threatened and bullied by prisoners. The idea behind the show is that the adolescents will realize what their future holds for them if they continue down the same path and be scared enough to reform themselves. In essence, this idea is the foundation of deterrence. In theory, citizens will not want to commit crimes because they do not want to go to prison. This method of the prison system is arguably the least used and potentially the most effective: perhaps if citizens knew the statistics behind getting caught for crimes and the harsh realities of the punishments for them, crime rates would go down. However, this method is seen as primarily ineffective. The data shows that increasing the severity of punishments does not deter crime. Lastly, rehabilitation is a widely controversial aspect of prison. While many see this idea as a primary goal, others feel that most prisoners are beyond redemption. The principle of correctional rehabilitation is that prisons should put more effort into transitioning their inmates to the outside world. This aspect includes hiring psychiatrists to analyze and counsel the inmates, setting up prison college systems, and allowing prisoners to make a wage during their sentence. In addition, this aspect may also include allowing prisoners to have regular communication with loved ones outside prison, as support systems are proven to be wildly effective when considering lowering recidivism rates. However, all of these aspects are heavily debated on because the essential principle of rehabilitation implies that eventually, the inmate will get out. Many LeJeune4 citizens and even prisons view inmates as less than normal people and as a result never imagine the prisoner when he or she gets out. For many, the idea that someone who committed a crime may one day be walking next to them again seems unreal. However, this situation is inevitable. As a result, it is unquestionably necessary that prisoners are able to make a pleasant transition from stone walls to city streets. Imagine never meeting your father. For as long as you remember, he’s been locked up for reasons that you are not old enough to understand. Your mother loves you and wants a better life for you, but as a single mother in the projects with several children, it is already a struggle to put food on the table, much less move to a better place with more opportunities. Maybe she brings lots of men around who promise her money and end up beating her. Her heart is in the right place, but this scene is devastating and psychologically damaging to a child. Your heart is in the right place too, but when you see every other youth you know getting caught up in selling, it seems like fair game to help out your family. You know that the drug ordeal is wrong, or maybe you don’t, but it’s the only way. Of all high school students in the United States, 25% don’t have to imagine. However, the big picture includes so much more than adolescent drug money. The United States prison system clearly has its flaws. “The land of the free” has more citizens behind bars than any other nation in the world, both scaled to other countries and in general. The country has less than 5% of the world’s population, yet it holds 25% of the world’s prison population (World Prison Populations). This almost unbelievable statistic has been cited by many major political figures, including Hillary LeJeune5 Clinton, but has been fact checked by numerous sources only to be proven as true. Per 100,000 citizens, the United States incarcerates 725, the highest prisoner-per-citizen rate in the world. The only nation that even comes close is Russia at 581. The United Kingdom, a country that is considered highly comparable to to the US, incarcerates only 145 per 100,000 (World Prison Populations). Clearly, mass incarceration in the United States should be considered an issue. However, mass incarceration isn’t the only problem that plagues the United States’ system. A much less considered viewpoint is the issue of crime cycles. These cycles present themselves in a number of ways, but all have the same end result: more citizens in prison. The first cycle includes children: when a citizen gets locked up, this adult potentially is leaving behind a child. This child, because United States prison allow such limited visitation rights and communication between prisoners and loved ones, leaves this child without one or potentially two parents. Without a strong parental figure around as the child grows, the kid is much more likely to commit a serious crime and end up in prison himself. If the system allowed for more visitation and contact, the child could possibly have grown up with a better moral support system and more incentive to choose a better life path. The next cycle is similar: this same original adult who was incarcerated, upon getting released from prison, often has no real support system due to getting cut off from the outside world, and no true prospects for continuing on with their life. Because the system places such little emphasis on rehabilitation and life after prison, the prisoner probably has no opportunity for getting a job. In addition, because of the United States’ philosophy and removal of themselves from prisoners, said citizens LeJeune6 committed of a crime are very unlikely to acquire a substantial job upon getting released. With no job and little to no support system, these released persons are much more likely to return to a life of crime and get locked up again. Another interesting point to view when considering crime cycles is that studies have been done that have seen a strong correlation between zip codes, academic achievement, and prison rates. A study done in Texas found that children born in particular zipcodes are more likely to not graduate from high school; additionally, these same zipcodes have higher incarceration rates than others (Clarke). All of these cycles seem to point to a similar conclusion: some citizens never have a chance at a better path when it comes to incarceration in the United States.