McNair Scholars Journal

Volume 9 | Issue 1 Article 12

2005 The Relationship Between Parole and Recidivism in the Criminal Justice System Jacquelin A. Robinson Grand Valley State University

Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/mcnair

Recommended Citation Robinson, Jacquelin A. (2005) "The Relationship Between Parole and Recidivism in the Criminal Justice System," McNair Scholars Journal: Vol. 9: Iss. 1, Article 12. Available at: http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/mcnair/vol9/iss1/12

Copyright © 2005 by the authors. McNair Scholars Journal is reproduced electronically by ScholarWorks@GVSU. http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/ mcnair?utm_source=scholarworks.gvsu.edu%2Fmcnair%2Fvol9%2Fiss1%2F12&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages The relationship between parole and recidivism in the criminal justice system

Abstract Introduction From 1990 to 1999 the criminal justice In July 1965, President Lyndon system experienced a fifty percent increase Johnson appointed the National in the inmate population, which included Crime Commission to make the most recidivated parolees. Critics claimed the comprehensive study of crime in the parole process was not working and lobbied history of our country at that time. legislature to take action. The system This report took over two years to responded by decreasing parole agency develop and when completed, it so budgets, increasing prison sentences, and frequently referred to all the components reducing rehabilitation services for paroled involved (law enforcement, judicial, inmates. Research pertaining to parole and and correctional) as the “system” that recidivism indicates two variables: there is it created the concept of a criminal or isn’t a direct association. The objective of justice system. The report, The challenge this study is to compare the data and decide of crime in a free society, gave us an if parole is a viable solution for decreasing exceptional insight into the nature of recidivism rates. crime and criminal justice in America. Also outlined in the report was the basic sequence of events in the criminal justice process. It also illustrated that Jacquelin A. Robinson relationships between the police, courts, McNair Scholar and corrections are interrelated and interdependent. The report included a reference to the importance of and need for a far broader, and more profound, range of treatment. The challenge of crime in a free society was considered, at that time, the blueprint for building a successful crime prevention system. Even though it suggested that the need was for all ages, it insisted treatment was especially crucial for the young. President Johnson’s report explained that the generation of teenagers during that time was the largest in U.S. history, and he foresaw a rise in juvenile delinquency in the decade to follow unless drastic changes were implemented in the effectiveness of the criminal justice system, as well as in economic and social conditions of the United States. One specific component in the report that caught my attention was recidivism of offenders on parole. The report stated that many offenders, the young most of all, stood a better chance James Houston, Ph.D. of being rehabilitated in their home Faculty Mentor communities, rather than in ordinary confinement. Included in the report were the findings of a study completed by the California Youth Authority. This

GVSU McNair Scholars Journal VOLUME 9, 2005 103 study concluded a five year experiment, industry in their prison work. By 1869, According to Joan Petersila (2000), which tested various methods of twenty-three states had good time laws, in Crime: Public policies for crime control treatment. In this research, the convicted and prison administrators supported the at the end of 1999 6.4 million adults juvenile delinquents were assigned to concept as a method of keeping order were under some form of correctional two groups. One cohort consisted of and controlling the prison population supervision, and only 1.9 million of that community placement. The other cohort size (Serrill as cited in Allen, Eskridge, number were in actual physical custody. consisted of placement in a regular Latessa, & Vito, 1985). In 1990, the number under correctional institution of confinement. Only 28 The first parole systems were supervision was 4.3 million, which is percent of the experimental group from controlled by state legislatures that, in an increase of 46.5 percent in only 10 community placement had their parole general, rigidly defined which prisoners years (Petersila, 2000, p. 483-484). revoked. More than half of those in the could be paroled. Most legislation Scholarly articles written by academics group assigned to prison later had their authorizing parole release restricted it are filled with terms such as best paroles revoked and were returned to to first time offenders convicted of less practice, effective practice, and what confinement (Johnson, 1966). serious crimes. Through the passage of works; these terms show that the critics In the nearly 40 years since the time and a gradual acceptance of the are insisting that correctional services report was published, the problem of idea of discretionary early release, the be more accountable and provide recidivism hasn’t changed nor has there privilege was eventually extended to evidence of their effectiveness (Burnett been any decrease. In fact, the rising serious offenders. By the late nineteenth & Roberts, 2004) numbers in the prison systems suggest and early twentieth century, criticism of an increase in recidivism. The Bureau of parole practices began to surface. The Literature Review Justice Statistics estimates that parolees basic arguments against parole were the This literature review probes what we are currently responsible for between 10 lack of supervision of parolees, which know about parole and recidivism to 12 percent of all arrests for serious put the community in danger, and and determines if there is, or is not, crimes in the United States (cited in the parole authorities who were not a direct association between parole Petersila, 2003). Also in 1999, 22 following proper procedures in releasing and recidivism. It also presents factors percent of those in state prisons reported deserving inmates (Allen, Eskridge, affecting the recidivism of offenders being on parole at the time they Latessa, & Vito, p. 30-31). on parole. Research on recidivism is committed the crime that landed them Parole has a long history in the scattered in three different disciplines: in prison. It is now well-documented criminal justice system but along criminology, sociology, and psychology. that the high parole revocation rate is with the decision to parole there This brief literature review is based on one of the major contributing factors must also be the discussion of parolee the findings in the scholarly journals to the growing U.S. prison population recidivating. This idea of recidivism and books from those disciplines. In the (Travis & Lawrence, 2002). runs concurrent with parole. The surveyed literature, it appears one can Parole is the status of an offender who Bureau of Justice Statistics compared find support for a relationship between has been conditionally released from the data from two studies which parole and recidivism. However, the prison prior to the expiration of his or came the closest to providing national strength of that correlation is controlled her sentence. This conditional freedom recidivism rates for the United States. by other variables such as: community is granted by a paroling agency to a One tracked 108,580 state prisoners cohesion, social disorganization, convicted offender, as long as the person released from prison in eleven states employment, economic well-being, meets certain conditions of behavior in 1983. The other tracked 272,111 family support, mental and physical while incarcerated (Schmalleger, 2003, prisoners released from prison in health, political alienation, housing, and p. 753). The concept of rewarding well- fifteen states in 1994. The prisoners homelessness (Petersila, June 2000). behaved prisoners with a reduction in tracked in these studies represented sentence was first formalized in 1817 two-thirds of all prisoners released in Analysis by the New York State legislature. In the United States for those years. Sixty- The method of study for this analysis that year, the first “good time” law was seven percent of prisoners released was to focus on the findings of previous passed. This law authorized a 25 percent in 1994 were rearrested within three studies and make a decision based on reduction in length of term for those years, an increase over the 62.5% for those findings. Prior research indicates inmates serving five years or more who those released in 1983 (Bureau of that the success rates of parolees are were well-behaved and demonstrated Justice Statistics). highly dependent upon the conditions

104 Relationship between parole and recidivism under which they are released. Although in the regular labor market (Holzer as citizens move from the area, disorder different models and characteristics cited in Petersila, November 2000). escalates, and serious crime often were used in the studies that were Unemployment directly influences crime, continues (Petersila, June 2000). reviewed, the underlying connection as well as two other social pathologies Petersila (June 2000) highlights the is the variables that appeared most closely related to both violence and conditions that parolees are finding significantly. It has been hypothesized property crime: drug and alcohol abuse. upon release into the community. that offenders who are released with Those who study life-course trajectories Most are being released to parole a continued service plan for reentry of criminal careers show that losing a systems that provide few services and are less likely to recidivate at the rates job can lead to substance abuse, which impose conditions that more than that are currently experienced by the in turn is related to child and family likely guaranteed failure. Even though criminal justice system. violence (National Research Council as monitoring systems are getting better, the cited in Petersila, June 2000). public tolerance for failure on parole is Does Parole Work? Inmates with mental illnesses are decreasing. The result is that many more To assess the relationship between parole also being imprisoned at higher rates parolees are being returned to prison, and recidivism, we have to look not only and ultimately are released back into putting pressure on states to build more at when a prisoner was released, but also the community on parole. In 1998, facilities—which limits money available how they were released and the other the Bureau of Justice Statistics (1999) for rehabilitation of parolees while in variables that are involved in that release. estimated that 16% of jail or prison the community. This cycle ensures Petersila (June 2000) looked at different inmates reported a mental condition or that parolees will continue to receive conditions such as community cohesion, an overnight stay in a mental hospital. fewer services to help them address social disorganization, employment, More to the point concerning mental the unfortunate collateral consequences of economic well-being, family support, illness and prisons is that mental parole. The relationship between parole mental and physical health, political illness can be agitated by incarceration, and recidivism in this study shows a alienation, housing, and homelessness particularly chronic anxiety and direct association when the significant and their effect on parolees. These depression. Psychologists believe that factors such as homelessness, mental “unfortunate collateral consequences” of incarceration often breeds global rage, an illness, etc. are not addressed. parole, as she referred to them, can and impulsive and explosive anger so great The Pennsylvania Department of most likely will dictate whether a parolee that a minor incident can trigger an Corrections (DOC), in response to is successful or not. Of the 500,000 uncontrolled response. Lastly, mentioned concerns that parole violators were parolees who leave U.S. prisons annually, in this report were the effects of becoming a driving force behind 17.2%, or nearly 1 in 5, live in California homelessness on the crime continuum. increasing prison admissions, conducted (Petersila, June 2000). While homelessness certainly affects a needs assessment of its parole violator Research has long documented how homeless individuals and the rest of population (Buckllen, Zajac, & Gnall, the social organization of neighborhoods their families, transients, panhandlers, 2004). To assess the needs of parole particularly poverty, ethnic composition, and vagrants also increase citizen fear, violators, the Pennsylvania DOC and residential stability influences crime. and that fear ultimately contributes conducted a survey of technical and Researchers have also written about to increased crime and violence. This convicted parole violators who returned tipping points, when communities are phenomenon originally labeled broken to prison in twelve state correctional no longer able to exert stable influences windows by Wilson and Kelling (as facilities. The study by the Pennsylvania over the behavior of residents. When cited in Petersila, June 2000), theorized DOC was built around a similar study these tipping points exist, the structure that increased crime often results from done in Canada in the late 1990s, which of a community changes, disorder a cycle of fear-induced behavior. For attempted to redirect attention from the and incivilities increase, out-migration example, when law-abiding citizens general determinants of recidivism to an follows, and crime and violence increase begin to avoid using streets filled with investigation into the individual processes (Wilson as cited in Petersila, November transients, loitering youth, graffiti, and of recidivism. Approximately 600 parole 2000). The majority of inmates other signs of property damage, they are violators were used in this study which leave prison with poor prospects for effectively yielding control of the streets covered a two-month time span. The 600 employment. Survey data indicate that to those who are not frightened by such violators selected represented 75 percent one year after being released, as many as signs of urban decay. As broken windows of the total parole violators readmitted to 60% of former inmates are not employed spread, businesses and law-abiding the system for the two-month period.

GVSU McNair Scholars Journal VOLUME 9, 2005 105 One of the first considerations of violators also had a problem with alcohol participants had the opportunity to give this survey was whether technical and drug abuse while on parole. For the information from their perception parole violators and convicted parole some violators, alcohol and other drug and view point. violators represented two significantly abuse proved to be a major obstacle and Jeremy Travis (May 2000), in a study different populations with unique contributed greatly to their recidivism. reported by the National Institute of needs. The Pennsylvania DOC study However, those who participated in a Justice, concluded that parole does not revealed compelling evidence of just the prison substance abuse program before reduce recidivism but does just the opposite and showed the two groups being released reported being able opposite. The numbers increase in the to be statistically similar. The Level to better cope with substance abuse criminal justice system when parole of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) problems (Buckllen, Zajac, & Gnall). is not successful and the parolee is scores indicated a similar distribution Another strong contributor to returned to the system. He stated that of risk levels for both groups (Buckllen, recidivism revealed by the Pennsylvania most states still had and maintained Zajac, & Gnall, 2004). The survey DOC survey was emotional problems, some form of parole supervision; answers revealed only two differences such as stress, depression, frustration, fourteen had actually abolished between the groups. Convicted parole and worry. Examination of the data parole boards who previously had the violators indicated money management revealed three more important factors. responsibility to release parolees. This problems, while technical violators First, many parole violators held study attempted to compare the value reported having trouble finding a place unrealistic expectations about what of incarceration to the value of parole. to live once released from incarceration. life would be like outside of prison. In this author’s view, the offender had These two differences were marginal Second, the majority of parole violators the obligation to society to serve the in importance and had no effect on indicated strong antisocial attitudes. sentence given and demonstrate an the results of the survey (Buckllen, Thirdly, the most prevalent theme ability to live according to society’s Zajac, & Gnall). The findings from this identified throughout the entire study rules. They also felt, at the time of this study were divided into four primary was that parole violators indicated study, that parole had been significantly sections, basically the same ones used poor self-management, self-control, weakened, and the system of parole in the prior study: living arrangements, and problem-solving skills in the face supervision was struggling to find employment, financial situation, and of every day problems. This study purpose (Travis, May 2000). drug and alcohol use. Nearly three- supported programming specifically Travis (May 2000) found that fourths of parole violators indicated focused on cognitive-behavioral rehabilitation programs are ineffective, they lived in low crime areas while out treatment as the deterrent to recidivism along with faulty parole decisions. but this perception of low crime areas rates. Also, re-entry programs should Parole supervision, no matter how may have been influenced by their focus on teaching parole violators life intensive, was found not to be a individual tolerance for crime levels. skills such as money management and contributor to reducing recidivism This group also reported encouraging financial responsibility. In addition, drug (Glaser as cited in Travis, May 2000). information concerning employment. and alcohol abuse treatment programs Further analysis revealed admissions Eighty-two percent of parole violators should be intensely reinforced for those resulting from parole violations are indicated they were legally employed who have an obvious abuse problem. now the driving force behind prison while seventeen percent reported Finally, this study suggested parole growth. Parole violators constitute 34% difficulties in finding a job once out on violators should stay “rooted in reality” of all admissions, a figure that almost parole. Some complained of available and maintain realistic post-release doubled from 1980 to 1995 (Bureau jobs being unsuitable and not sufficient expectations (Buckllen, Zajac, & Gnall). of Justice Statistics, 1996). In 1984, to live on. Even though this could have This study focused on addressing 70% of those who left parole status been a legitimate complaint, further data the needs of the parole violators were determined to be successful; but revealed unreasonable expectations when through self-reported experiences of in 1996 less than half were successful it came to accepting jobs offered to some the recidivated parolees. Although there in completing their parole terms parole violators. According to the parole was definitely a relationship indicated, (Petersila as cited in Travis, May 2000). violators surveyed, money management the approach of this study focused on Travis (May 2000) recommended, problems was one of the strongest needs assessment to prevent future from his findings, that new ways had contributors to their recidivism. Survey parolees from recidivating. In reviewing to be created to manage the parolee’s results revealed a great number of parole this study, we have to consider that the successful re-entry into society.

106 Relationship between parole and recidivism Instead of treatment and Discussion The three studies used for this report, programming being separate entities The goal of this brief literature review is out of the 50 surveyed, were chosen in correctional institutions and parole, to assess at an aggregate level whether because of the variables included in the two should mix and become one the relationship between parole and reporting the major areas of interest and process. For example, according to recidivism is of any significance. As as examples of the literature surveyed. Travis and Lawrence (2000), the drug stated earlier, Travis and Lawrence Although at this time, parole supervision treatment continuum would combine (2000) showed a direct association is shown to have little effect on the treatment with the criminal justice between parole and recidivism. As recidivism rates, criminal justice scholars process under one umbrella for a the parole rates continued to go up realize something must be developed to united effort at reducing drug use and so did the recidivism rates. I can combat crime and recidivism. President recidivism. The basis for their report only conclude that there is a definite Lyndon Johnson attempted to address was that the challenge of reducing the relationship of significance between the the idea of a combined effort to win in numbers of returning parolees would two variables. Parole, when coupled this “war on crime” 40 years ago. Maybe build interagency relationships. This with the unfortunate consequences it’s time for it to be achieved. interagency relationship would be a of drug and alcohol abuse, conglomerate between incarceration and unemployment, homelessness, and parole and probation. mental and physical illnesses, create the conditions for recidivism.

GVSU McNair Scholars Journal VOLUME 9, 2005 107 References

Allen, H., Eskridge, C., Latessa, E., & Vito G, (1985). Probation and parole in America. New York, N.Y.: McMillan, Inc.

Buckllen, K., Zajac, G., & Gnall, K., ( April 2004). Understanding and responding to the needs of parole violators. Corrections Today, p 66.

Bureau of Justice Statistics (1999). Reentry trends in the U.S.: Recidivism. Retrieved July 19, 2005.

Bureau of Justice Statistics (1996). Correctional populations in the United States 1996. Retrieved July 19, 2005 from www.ojp.usdog.gov/bjs/reentry/recidivism.htm.

Burnett, R., & Roberts, C. (Eds.) (2003). What works in probation and youth justice: Developing evidence based practice. England: Wilan.

Petersila, J. (November 2000). When Prisoners Return to the Community: Political, Economic, and Social Consequences. (NIJ Publication N. 9) Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office.

Petersila, J. ( June 2000). Challenges of prisoner reentry and parole in California. Retrieved July 19, 2005 from www.ucop.edu/cprc/parole.html.

Petersila, J (2000). Community corrections. In Crime: Public policies for crime control (Eds) Wilson, J., & Petersila, J., Oakland, CA: ICS.

Petersila, J. (2003). When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry. New York: Oxford.

Schmalleger, F. (2003). Criminal justice today 7th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Travis, J (May 2000). But they all come back: Rethinking prisoner reentry. U.S. Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice, p. 7.

Travis, J., & Lawrence, S. (2002). Beyond the prison gates: The state of parole in America. Washington, D.C. The Urban Institute.

United States. President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. (1967) The challenge of crime in a free society; a report. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off.

108 Relationship between Parole and Recidivism