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
Friday, August 21, 2009
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?
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
What would you do if...
Let's say you agree with prison reform and with the concept of helping those released from prison reenter society successfully. Maybe you decide to get your church involved in a prison ministry, going into the prisons to work with offenders, perhaps to do Bible study, maybe to teach life skills classes in the hope that you can make a difference in a life gone wrong. Are you thinking, "Good for me!" "Good for my church!" Probably so. And prison ministry is good for you and for your church, but not in the way you may think.
Prison ministry is not just a "feel good" exercise, as my own church quickly learned. Those guys in kakhi outfits are going to be released one day, and when they've served their time, paid their debt, how will my church and yours respond? After all, it's one thing to go into the prisons to visit and quite another to have one of those released inmates walk into your pretty neighborhood sanctuary. I mean, Jesus didn't say, "bring those prisoners into the temple," he said, "visit those in prison." Right? I wonder what that reasoning would have meant for Paul? Not only did Paul continue to preach, write, and teach after he was released from prison, Jesus kept him on as a disciple. Wow! And what about all those sinners that Jesus ran around with? Seems to me that Christ meant for us not to abandon our neighbors, any of our neighbors.
This week, I hope my church can find the courage and the faith to be the face of Christ to one of these newly released felons. As a church we won't go into this blindly, or naively. We understand that 5-years inside has changed Michael, and the world outside has also changed. We realize that he went to jail because, for whatever reason, he didn't consider the ramifications of his actions. The fact that he was stoned when he committed his crime doesn't absolve him of his responsibility for that act. The question I want to ask is, what were the circumstances that created his underlying drug adiction to begin with?
Now that he's been drug free for 5-years and completed a substance abuse course, how will he be able to stay clean on the outside? Who will be his mentors? What support systems will he find if not the church? He's going to be out on the streets regardless. So we, the church, have 2 choices as I see it. We can help Michael be accountable for his actions by inviting him into our hearts and our congregation, or we can turn our faces away and pretend not to see him.
Prison ministry is not just a "feel good" exercise, as my own church quickly learned. Those guys in kakhi outfits are going to be released one day, and when they've served their time, paid their debt, how will my church and yours respond? After all, it's one thing to go into the prisons to visit and quite another to have one of those released inmates walk into your pretty neighborhood sanctuary. I mean, Jesus didn't say, "bring those prisoners into the temple," he said, "visit those in prison." Right? I wonder what that reasoning would have meant for Paul? Not only did Paul continue to preach, write, and teach after he was released from prison, Jesus kept him on as a disciple. Wow! And what about all those sinners that Jesus ran around with? Seems to me that Christ meant for us not to abandon our neighbors, any of our neighbors.
This week, I hope my church can find the courage and the faith to be the face of Christ to one of these newly released felons. As a church we won't go into this blindly, or naively. We understand that 5-years inside has changed Michael, and the world outside has also changed. We realize that he went to jail because, for whatever reason, he didn't consider the ramifications of his actions. The fact that he was stoned when he committed his crime doesn't absolve him of his responsibility for that act. The question I want to ask is, what were the circumstances that created his underlying drug adiction to begin with?
Now that he's been drug free for 5-years and completed a substance abuse course, how will he be able to stay clean on the outside? Who will be his mentors? What support systems will he find if not the church? He's going to be out on the streets regardless. So we, the church, have 2 choices as I see it. We can help Michael be accountable for his actions by inviting him into our hearts and our congregation, or we can turn our faces away and pretend not to see him.
Friday, July 24, 2009
Life Sentence with No Parole on the Rise
A recent article in the New York Times brings focus to the increasing number of inmates serving life sentences across the U.S. Here's just one example in an article reprinted here from Prison Fellowship.com.
By SOLOMON MOORE
Published: July 22, 2009
More prisoners today are serving life terms than ever before — 140,610 out of 2.3 million inmates being held in jails and prisons across the country — under tough mandatory minimum-sentencing laws and the declining use of parole for eligible convicts, according to a report released Wednesday by The Sentencing Project,a group that calls for the elimination of life sentences without parole. The report tracks the increase in life sentences from 1984, when the number of inmates serving life terms was 34,000.
Two-thirds of prisoners serving life sentences are Latino or black, the report found. In New York State, for example, 16.3 percent of prisoners serving life terms are white.
Although most people serving life terms were convicted of violent crimes, sentencing experts say there are many exceptions, like Norman Williams, 46, who served 13 years of a life sentence for stealing a floor jack out of a tow truck, a crime that was his third strike. He was released from Folsom State Prison in California in April after appealing his conviction on the grounds of insufficient counsel.
The rising number of inmates serving life terms is straining corrections budgets at a time when financially strapped states are struggling to cut costs. California’s prison system, the nation’s largest, with 170,000 inmates, also had the highest number of prisoners with life sentences, 34,164, or triple the number in 1992, the report found.
In four other states — Alabama, Massachusetts, Nevada and New York — at least one in six prisoners is serving a life term, according to the report.
The California prison system is in federal receivership for overcrowding and failing to provide adequate medical care to prisoners, many of whom are elderly and serving life terms.
Margo Johnson, 48, also an inmate at the women’s prison here, has served 24 years of a life sentence for a 1984 murder. She has been recommended for release four times by the state parole board, but she said that Mr. Schwarzenegger had rejected the board’s recommendation each time.
“Sometimes I wonder, is it just a game they’re playing with me?” Ms. Johnson said.
Seven prison systems — Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Pennsylvania, South Dakota and the federal penitentiary system — do not offer the possibility of parole to prisoners serving life terms.
That policy also extends to juveniles in Illinois, Louisiana and Pennsylvania. A total of 6,807 juveniles were serving life terms in 2008, 1,755 without the possibility of parole. California again led the nation in the number of juveniles serving life terms, with 2,623.
“The expansion of life sentences suggests that we’re rapidly losing faith in the rehabilitation model,” said Ashley Nellis, the report’s main author.
De Angelo McVay, 42, is serving a life term with no possibility of parole at the maximum security state prison in Lancaster, Calif., for his role in the kidnapping and torture of a man.
He said in an interview Wednesday that he had used his 10 years in prison to reform himself, taking ministry classes, participating in the prison chapel program, becoming vice chairman of his prison yard and avoiding behavioral demerits.
“I’m remorseful for what I did,” he said. “But I got no chance at parole, and I know guys who have committed killings and they have parole.”
By SOLOMON MOORE
Published: July 22, 2009
More prisoners today are serving life terms than ever before — 140,610 out of 2.3 million inmates being held in jails and prisons across the country — under tough mandatory minimum-sentencing laws and the declining use of parole for eligible convicts, according to a report released Wednesday by The Sentencing Project,a group that calls for the elimination of life sentences without parole. The report tracks the increase in life sentences from 1984, when the number of inmates serving life terms was 34,000.
Two-thirds of prisoners serving life sentences are Latino or black, the report found. In New York State, for example, 16.3 percent of prisoners serving life terms are white.
Although most people serving life terms were convicted of violent crimes, sentencing experts say there are many exceptions, like Norman Williams, 46, who served 13 years of a life sentence for stealing a floor jack out of a tow truck, a crime that was his third strike. He was released from Folsom State Prison in California in April after appealing his conviction on the grounds of insufficient counsel.
The rising number of inmates serving life terms is straining corrections budgets at a time when financially strapped states are struggling to cut costs. California’s prison system, the nation’s largest, with 170,000 inmates, also had the highest number of prisoners with life sentences, 34,164, or triple the number in 1992, the report found.
In four other states — Alabama, Massachusetts, Nevada and New York — at least one in six prisoners is serving a life term, according to the report.
The California prison system is in federal receivership for overcrowding and failing to provide adequate medical care to prisoners, many of whom are elderly and serving life terms.
Margo Johnson, 48, also an inmate at the women’s prison here, has served 24 years of a life sentence for a 1984 murder. She has been recommended for release four times by the state parole board, but she said that Mr. Schwarzenegger had rejected the board’s recommendation each time.
“Sometimes I wonder, is it just a game they’re playing with me?” Ms. Johnson said.
Seven prison systems — Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Pennsylvania, South Dakota and the federal penitentiary system — do not offer the possibility of parole to prisoners serving life terms.
That policy also extends to juveniles in Illinois, Louisiana and Pennsylvania. A total of 6,807 juveniles were serving life terms in 2008, 1,755 without the possibility of parole. California again led the nation in the number of juveniles serving life terms, with 2,623.
“The expansion of life sentences suggests that we’re rapidly losing faith in the rehabilitation model,” said Ashley Nellis, the report’s main author.
De Angelo McVay, 42, is serving a life term with no possibility of parole at the maximum security state prison in Lancaster, Calif., for his role in the kidnapping and torture of a man.
He said in an interview Wednesday that he had used his 10 years in prison to reform himself, taking ministry classes, participating in the prison chapel program, becoming vice chairman of his prison yard and avoiding behavioral demerits.
“I’m remorseful for what I did,” he said. “But I got no chance at parole, and I know guys who have committed killings and they have parole.”
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Support and Accountability work
There are over 2 million inmates in prisons across the United States, making the U.S. the leader in incarceration rates in the world. That's not a leadership role to which we should aspire, but our "tough on crime" politics, "3-Strikes and you're out" attitude and minimum sentencing laws set us on a fast track to this sort of dubious success.
Coming to a Neighborhood Near You
Let me ask you a question: If you had no money, no job, no transportation, no particular job training, and a big hole in your work history for the past several years, how likely would you be to succeed over the next 3 years? Right! Not very likely, at least not without help.
The fact is that two-thirds of the incarcerated will be released one of these days and will return to their former home towns. Unfortunately they are ill prepared to meet the challenges of life on the other side of the prison walls. They lack job skill training and so have a hard time finding a job. They are often naive about finances and lack budgeting skills, causing them to overdraw checking accounts and have vehicles repossessed. No vehicle, no job in many areas where public transportation is restricted by city limits. They don't understand how to navigate the world, use a computer, contract for services, or protect their own rights. Many have learning disabilities that further limit their progress in all these areas and more. So is it any wonder so many end up back in jail within the first 3-years?
Circles of Support and Accountability
I want to bring your attention to a program out of Canada that is designed to reduce recidivism, especially in high risk offenders, by providing support through a mentoring program that holds the released accountable for their actions. Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) began in Ontario 10-years ago. Today, similar projects have been seeded all over Canada, the U.S. and through Eastern Europe, South Africa and Bermuda. Follow up studies have shown a 70% decrease in recidivism by sex offenders, 57% reduction in all types of violent crime recidivism, and an overall reduction of 35% in all types of crimes. Think of the reduction in taxes this level of reduction would deliver!
So there is a proven method of supporting men and women released from prison. Supporting them in such a way that they can become productive members of society again - tax paying citizens, rather than tax burdens on society. But, as the saying goes, "it takes a village." Psychologist, Ida Dickie, PhD.,C, Spalding University, Louisville, Ky and her colleagues Robin Wilson, PhD., C. Psych, Humber Institute of Technology & Advanced Learning, and Eileen Henderson, B.A., Mennonite Central Committee, Ontario, remind us that, "the community lives in fear of offenders and responses to dealing with this fear are varied throughout history. At the end of the day, reduced recidivism is every one's business - offender, victim and community."
In my next blog I'll outline exactly how COSA is organized and show you why it works, but for now, think about it. We are all responsible aren't we? We're either part of the problem due to fear, or we're part of the solution through community action.
Coming to a Neighborhood Near You
Let me ask you a question: If you had no money, no job, no transportation, no particular job training, and a big hole in your work history for the past several years, how likely would you be to succeed over the next 3 years? Right! Not very likely, at least not without help.
The fact is that two-thirds of the incarcerated will be released one of these days and will return to their former home towns. Unfortunately they are ill prepared to meet the challenges of life on the other side of the prison walls. They lack job skill training and so have a hard time finding a job. They are often naive about finances and lack budgeting skills, causing them to overdraw checking accounts and have vehicles repossessed. No vehicle, no job in many areas where public transportation is restricted by city limits. They don't understand how to navigate the world, use a computer, contract for services, or protect their own rights. Many have learning disabilities that further limit their progress in all these areas and more. So is it any wonder so many end up back in jail within the first 3-years?
Circles of Support and Accountability
I want to bring your attention to a program out of Canada that is designed to reduce recidivism, especially in high risk offenders, by providing support through a mentoring program that holds the released accountable for their actions. Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) began in Ontario 10-years ago. Today, similar projects have been seeded all over Canada, the U.S. and through Eastern Europe, South Africa and Bermuda. Follow up studies have shown a 70% decrease in recidivism by sex offenders, 57% reduction in all types of violent crime recidivism, and an overall reduction of 35% in all types of crimes. Think of the reduction in taxes this level of reduction would deliver!
So there is a proven method of supporting men and women released from prison. Supporting them in such a way that they can become productive members of society again - tax paying citizens, rather than tax burdens on society. But, as the saying goes, "it takes a village." Psychologist, Ida Dickie, PhD.,C, Spalding University, Louisville, Ky and her colleagues Robin Wilson, PhD., C. Psych, Humber Institute of Technology & Advanced Learning, and Eileen Henderson, B.A., Mennonite Central Committee, Ontario, remind us that, "the community lives in fear of offenders and responses to dealing with this fear are varied throughout history. At the end of the day, reduced recidivism is every one's business - offender, victim and community."
In my next blog I'll outline exactly how COSA is organized and show you why it works, but for now, think about it. We are all responsible aren't we? We're either part of the problem due to fear, or we're part of the solution through community action.
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Watch a lot of TV?
If you do, then your concept of prison facilities and inmate life is probably somewhat skewed. Let's take a look at some facts about security levels and inmate assignments in Federal prisons.
There are 5 levels of security in Federal prison facilities: Minimum, Low, Medium, High and Administrative.
Minimum Security Prison Camps (FCPs) have a low inmate to staff ratio and may have no peremeter fencing. These camps are often adjacent to a larger facility and inmate labor supports the needs of the larger institution.
Low Security Federal Corrections Institutes (FCIs) have dormatory or cubical style housing and have strong work and program components with an inmate to staff ratio lower than in other institutions.
Medium Security Prisons (FCIs and USPs) have a higher level of security with detection systems, double fencing, high inmate to staff ratios. These prisons offer a wide range of treatment programs and opportunities to work and learn a trade while in prison.
High Security, often called United States Penitentiaries (USPs) have the highest level of security and tightly restrict inmate movement.
Administrative Prisons have different missions. Some house prisoners awaiting trial while others house inmates with severe mental or medical disorders, those deemed extremely violent or escape risks.
Back to my comment about television and its impact on our thinking, we tend to imagine all prisons as being the kind we see on T.V. - High Security. However, most of the current inmate population in the U.S. reside in low to medium security facilities. Some 75% of the prison population has a learning disability or emotional condition that makes personal learning and growth difficult, and in some cases is the root cause for their having committed a crime.
There are 5 levels of security in Federal prison facilities: Minimum, Low, Medium, High and Administrative.
Minimum Security Prison Camps (FCPs) have a low inmate to staff ratio and may have no peremeter fencing. These camps are often adjacent to a larger facility and inmate labor supports the needs of the larger institution.
Low Security Federal Corrections Institutes (FCIs) have dormatory or cubical style housing and have strong work and program components with an inmate to staff ratio lower than in other institutions.
Medium Security Prisons (FCIs and USPs) have a higher level of security with detection systems, double fencing, high inmate to staff ratios. These prisons offer a wide range of treatment programs and opportunities to work and learn a trade while in prison.
High Security, often called United States Penitentiaries (USPs) have the highest level of security and tightly restrict inmate movement.
Administrative Prisons have different missions. Some house prisoners awaiting trial while others house inmates with severe mental or medical disorders, those deemed extremely violent or escape risks.
Back to my comment about television and its impact on our thinking, we tend to imagine all prisons as being the kind we see on T.V. - High Security. However, most of the current inmate population in the U.S. reside in low to medium security facilities. Some 75% of the prison population has a learning disability or emotional condition that makes personal learning and growth difficult, and in some cases is the root cause for their having committed a crime.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)