When I talk to people about prison ministry, recidivism rates and the like, I find that many have a T.V. opinion of what prisons are like and what it's like to be an inmate. While it's true that a great number of incarcerated individuals have mental and/or emotional deficits, there are also a surprising number of folks behind bars who are just as ordinary as you or I. Ordinary, in the sense that, while they have made a big mistake in their lives, (maybe several mistakes), they have families that they love and look forward to being with again when their sentence is fulfilled.
T.V. programs need ratings, so they sensationalize the prison experience and show only the worst of it, riots, fights, etc. And of course that sort of stuff goes on from time to time inside the razor wire. But by in large, prison is a community of its own making. Men go to work at prison jobs, eat in the cafeteria, sleep in bunks in a quad or barracks, enjoy some free time outside smoking or playing ball. They often attend worship services that the prison is required to offer them, and many of them go to school to get a GED or an advanced degree.
This week I found one of the best books I've ever read about prison life. Autobiography of an Execution, by David Dow. Mr. Dow is an attorney specializing in death row cases. His work is all pro-bono and his clients seldom win their appeals, yet he continues. Why? Let me encourage you to read Dow's book. It may forever change how you think about the death sentence and about prison life.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Friday, January 14, 2011
Kentucky working to reduce recidivism
Kentucky, the state that led the nation with the highest rate of recidivism last year, has begun to make progress in reducing the number of ex-offenders that return to prison within the first year of their release. Sounds great doesn't it? But there's more to the numbers than may immedately meet the eye. While the 2008 rate of recidivism (29.5 percent) is the lowest since 2000, at least some of this progress, according to a recent statement by Corrections Commissioner LaDonna Thompson, is the result of changes in probation and parole procedures. These changes include decreasing the number of people going back to prison due to certain technical parole violations such as missed curfew or failing to provide an updated address in a timely fashion.
Now I'm all for anything that reduces the cost to incarcerate, and certainly these changes have made big savings ($447 million) there is still a lot of work to be done to insure that ex-offenders both don't commit new crimes AND become productive tax paying citizens. That's where programs such as Mission Behind Bars and Beyond is helping.
Mission Behind Bars and Beyond trains community volunteers to create small Accountability Teams that surround an ex-offender, offering mentoring, goal setting and accountability of goal attainment. Ex-offenders and volunteers work together to identify needs such as housing, transportation, education, and employment, and set goals to address those issues. Team members create a mentoring community, a safe environment of trust that allows an ex-offender to learn skills necessary for successful transition into society.
Mission Behind Bars and Beyond is funded by donations from individuals like you who have an interest in helping the marginalized of society improve their situation. To learn more, be sure to visit http://www.missionbehindbarsandbeyond.org/
Working together with volunteers, prison officials and local and state governments, we all benefit.
Now I'm all for anything that reduces the cost to incarcerate, and certainly these changes have made big savings ($447 million) there is still a lot of work to be done to insure that ex-offenders both don't commit new crimes AND become productive tax paying citizens. That's where programs such as Mission Behind Bars and Beyond is helping.
Mission Behind Bars and Beyond trains community volunteers to create small Accountability Teams that surround an ex-offender, offering mentoring, goal setting and accountability of goal attainment. Ex-offenders and volunteers work together to identify needs such as housing, transportation, education, and employment, and set goals to address those issues. Team members create a mentoring community, a safe environment of trust that allows an ex-offender to learn skills necessary for successful transition into society.
Mission Behind Bars and Beyond is funded by donations from individuals like you who have an interest in helping the marginalized of society improve their situation. To learn more, be sure to visit http://www.missionbehindbarsandbeyond.org/
Working together with volunteers, prison officials and local and state governments, we all benefit.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Florida Parole System Bests Kentucky
I am amazed, as I know you will be, that in Kentucky an inmate coming up for parole has no legal representation at his parole hearing. Think about that. Here comes this inmate who may or may not be literate, may or may not have any understanding of the parole system, and may or may not be able to express him/herself verbally, to stand before a 3-person parole board and in about 15-minutes convey the story of his life change in such a way that he successfully wins parole. I don't think I could do that!
To be fair, the parole board has, presumably had a chance to review the inmates records in advance. So these individuals, who often attend a parole hearing only by video conference, have the sort of knowledge of this inmate that paper documents can provide. Beyond that however, they have no sense of the person standing before them or who face appears on the video screen. It's up to the inmate to plead his/her case.
Now let's contrast this scenareo with the Florida Parole system in which an attorney appears on behalf of the inmate and another attorney appears on behalf of the State. Witnesses, such as the inmates minister, prison chaplin, former employer or teacher, may be called to appear and testify on behalf of the inmate or against him/her. The Board has access to the inmates' prison record of course, but also has a chance to really get a feel for who the inmates was, is and perhaps could be in the future.
My question is, which do you perceive as the most balanced and fair system? Kind of a no-brainer isn't it?
To be fair, the parole board has, presumably had a chance to review the inmates records in advance. So these individuals, who often attend a parole hearing only by video conference, have the sort of knowledge of this inmate that paper documents can provide. Beyond that however, they have no sense of the person standing before them or who face appears on the video screen. It's up to the inmate to plead his/her case.
Now let's contrast this scenareo with the Florida Parole system in which an attorney appears on behalf of the inmate and another attorney appears on behalf of the State. Witnesses, such as the inmates minister, prison chaplin, former employer or teacher, may be called to appear and testify on behalf of the inmate or against him/her. The Board has access to the inmates' prison record of course, but also has a chance to really get a feel for who the inmates was, is and perhaps could be in the future.
My question is, which do you perceive as the most balanced and fair system? Kind of a no-brainer isn't it?
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Kentucky Law Repealed as Unconstitutional
In a 5-2 decision today, the Supreme Court of Kentucky ruled that a law limiting where registered sex offenders can live is unconstitutional in that it attempted to be applied retroactively from its inception date of July 12, 2006. The court rulled that the law cannot apply to those who committed offenses before the day the original law was enacted. The law, that prohibits sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of playgrounds, daycare centers and schools also changed how the distance is measured.
In this ruling, the court said the law is punitive in nature and violates the ex post facto clause, or retroactive law, in the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits states from passing laws that increase punishment for old crimes. The restrictions will still apply to anyone convicted after July 2006. You may remember that the whole issue came to the Supreme Court because of ex-offenders who were now living peacefully in homes they owned prior to 2006. Enactment of the original version of the law meant that these individuals would, in some cases, have to sell their homes and move or be in violation of the law.
While the action today may be good news for some, I expect we've not heard the end of this and can just imagine the uproar that will ensue from those who follow the Salem Witch Trial philosophy of "kill them first and then ask questions."
In this ruling, the court said the law is punitive in nature and violates the ex post facto clause, or retroactive law, in the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits states from passing laws that increase punishment for old crimes. The restrictions will still apply to anyone convicted after July 2006. You may remember that the whole issue came to the Supreme Court because of ex-offenders who were now living peacefully in homes they owned prior to 2006. Enactment of the original version of the law meant that these individuals would, in some cases, have to sell their homes and move or be in violation of the law.
While the action today may be good news for some, I expect we've not heard the end of this and can just imagine the uproar that will ensue from those who follow the Salem Witch Trial philosophy of "kill them first and then ask questions."
Friday, August 21, 2009
A Miami law is forcing many of the city's sex offenders to sleep rough under a bridge, reports Emilio San Pedro for the BBC's Americana program.
70 convicted sex offenders have ended up living in a makeshift tent city under one of Miami's causeway bridges because of a local law which prohibits those who have sexually abused minors from living within 2,500 ft of anywhere where children congregate, such as schools, libraries and parks. After the local laws were enacted, Florida's correctional authorities found there was virtually nowhere else for these people to live and began dropping them off at the bridge. Some of them have even been issued with driving licences with the bridge listed as their home address.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),and others like Dr Pedro Jose Greer, the Dean of Florida International University's Department of Humanities, Health and Society- who believe the offenders have already served their time in prison and deserve the right to attempt to get on with their lives - the camp's existence and the desperate conditions there serve as a troubling reflection of the values of modern-day Miami.
This article is an adaptation of a feature that was originally broadcast on BBC Radio 4's Americana programme. Americana is broadcast at 1915 BST every Sunday on BBC Radio 4 FM.
What in the world is this country coming to? How do we expect a reduction in recividism when we treat people this way? Where is our Christianity? Get involved in the solution at www.luckettprisonministry.com
70 convicted sex offenders have ended up living in a makeshift tent city under one of Miami's causeway bridges because of a local law which prohibits those who have sexually abused minors from living within 2,500 ft of anywhere where children congregate, such as schools, libraries and parks. After the local laws were enacted, Florida's correctional authorities found there was virtually nowhere else for these people to live and began dropping them off at the bridge. Some of them have even been issued with driving licences with the bridge listed as their home address.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),and others like Dr Pedro Jose Greer, the Dean of Florida International University's Department of Humanities, Health and Society- who believe the offenders have already served their time in prison and deserve the right to attempt to get on with their lives - the camp's existence and the desperate conditions there serve as a troubling reflection of the values of modern-day Miami.
This article is an adaptation of a feature that was originally broadcast on BBC Radio 4's Americana programme. Americana is broadcast at 1915 BST every Sunday on BBC Radio 4 FM.
What in the world is this country coming to? How do we expect a reduction in recividism when we treat people this way? Where is our Christianity? Get involved in the solution at www.luckettprisonministry.com
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
The Rich Young Ruler
I was reminded today that prison reform is a bit like the story of the rich young ruler that Jesus taught. This rich young guy had it all, but he really wanted what Jesus had to offer. So he asked Jesus what he had to do to be saved and the answer was, "sell everything you have and follow me." Now I always thought of that story in terms of money. You know, give up all your riches and then you can follow Jesus. But my pastor reminded me that this story is really about following all of Jesus' teachings, not just those that are comfortable for us. Jesus didn't say, visit those in prison while they are inside, but don't have anything to do with them when they get out. Jesus said, "Love thy neighbor." He meant ALL thy neighbors. He intended for us to help each other grow and mature into the people God made us to be. So, we don't get to pick and choose which of his teachings we follow, now do we?
Prison reform and prison ministry is a lot like that isn't it? We don't have a problem with visiting inside the prisons, but when it comes to changing sentencing laws or our thinking on what a prison is suppose to accomplish, well that's more difficult for us to get our arms around. The concept of changing the way we think about prison and prisoners can be very challenging.
We have questions:
* What exactly happens if we change the way we do prison today?
* When does that change cross the line between improving society, including the microcosmic society inside the walls, and bleeding heart liberalism?
* What happens if life skills training and other educational offerings inside promote more early release?
* Isn't all this leading to disaster?
My answer is, it all depends on what we perceive imprisonment to accomplish. Are we simply looking for a place to lock social deviants away for some period of time so that we don't have to think about them? Do we believe that being locked up is in itself a deterrent against future crime?
We already know that incarceration is expensive, costing roughly $20,000 per inmate, per year in the U.S. And we already know that those released from prison to supportive environments, such as a church family or Circles of Support & Accountability (COSA) program, are 50 - 70 percent less likely to re offend. So it stands to reason that if prison reform could reduce recidivism by providing more pre and post release resources, the nation's overall cost of incarceration would be reduced, saving all of us tax dollars.
Wouldn't you agree?
Prison reform and prison ministry is a lot like that isn't it? We don't have a problem with visiting inside the prisons, but when it comes to changing sentencing laws or our thinking on what a prison is suppose to accomplish, well that's more difficult for us to get our arms around. The concept of changing the way we think about prison and prisoners can be very challenging.
We have questions:
* What exactly happens if we change the way we do prison today?
* When does that change cross the line between improving society, including the microcosmic society inside the walls, and bleeding heart liberalism?
* What happens if life skills training and other educational offerings inside promote more early release?
* Isn't all this leading to disaster?
My answer is, it all depends on what we perceive imprisonment to accomplish. Are we simply looking for a place to lock social deviants away for some period of time so that we don't have to think about them? Do we believe that being locked up is in itself a deterrent against future crime?
We already know that incarceration is expensive, costing roughly $20,000 per inmate, per year in the U.S. And we already know that those released from prison to supportive environments, such as a church family or Circles of Support & Accountability (COSA) program, are 50 - 70 percent less likely to re offend. So it stands to reason that if prison reform could reduce recidivism by providing more pre and post release resources, the nation's overall cost of incarceration would be reduced, saving all of us tax dollars.
Wouldn't you agree?
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Private Prisons
Today's Louisville paper, The Courier-Journal, ran an article discussing whether or not it would save money if Kentucky were to increase its use of reliance on privately run prisons. Many of you may not know that the State does not run/manage all the prisons. According to this article, there are 3 privately run prisons in Kentucky housing about 6 percent of the 21,386 member prison population across the Commonwealth. The case for privatization, according to the article, is that privately run prisons cost Kentucky $2,500 less per inmate than the average cost in the 13 facilities operated by the state.
On the face of it, any reduced costs sound like a good thing. I have to throw my hat in with Sen. Robert Stivers, R-Manchester, and Rep. John Tilley, D-Hopkinsville, who said they didn't know enough about the matter to form an opinion. What I do know is that article failed to address the larger issue, which is, what is the purpose of our prisons? And secondarily, what are we willing to pay for in order to fulfill that purpose?
I want to know what you think. Are our prisons intended to be merely detainment facilities? Places where those individuals we all want to forget about are housed until they have served their sentence, after which we plan to toss them out onto society to sink or swim? Or do we truly believe them to be "Correctional" facilities where inmates receive training for life, not just for job skills and are released into an environment of mentoring and accountability that allows them to succeed and become productive citizens outside the razor wire fence?
On the face of it, any reduced costs sound like a good thing. I have to throw my hat in with Sen. Robert Stivers, R-Manchester, and Rep. John Tilley, D-Hopkinsville, who said they didn't know enough about the matter to form an opinion. What I do know is that article failed to address the larger issue, which is, what is the purpose of our prisons? And secondarily, what are we willing to pay for in order to fulfill that purpose?
I want to know what you think. Are our prisons intended to be merely detainment facilities? Places where those individuals we all want to forget about are housed until they have served their sentence, after which we plan to toss them out onto society to sink or swim? Or do we truly believe them to be "Correctional" facilities where inmates receive training for life, not just for job skills and are released into an environment of mentoring and accountability that allows them to succeed and become productive citizens outside the razor wire fence?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)