The Prison Reentry System Needs To Change
I turn 18 in two months. One of the biggest irrational fears I have about this is the fact that I will be charged as an adult for any crimes I commit. One may wonder, “Well what crimes are you planning on commiting?” but the more important question is, “Why do you fear the prison system so much?” The simple answer to this lies in the many flaws awaiting any prisoner; from bail, to civil forfeiture, to prison labor — the system is riddled with issues, one of the biggest being the prison reentry system in place. This is the case because the prison reentry system affects everyone who gets released from jail and only benefits a minority of said people. Most people consider what it’s like to go to jail, less picture what it’s like to be incarcerated for any amount of time, seldom few ever think about what life is like after going through the prison system. Sure, it’s bad to go to jail, but how bad is it to get out? The reality of the issue is that people are often left with no money in their pockets, no way back home, no chances of getting a job, and in many cases, no home at all.
The first issues involving prison reentry starts when prisoners are allowed to leave. Many report getting as little as fifteen dollars for their journey and no other forms of support (Bryne). This means if you don’t have family or friends — or more importantly — family or friends who can afford to take the trip to bring you back from jail, you’re virtually stranded, often in the middle of nowhere. This lack of care is evident even in cases of exonerated prisoners. Sadly, even if you can make it to your next destination, you’ll still be facing an uphill battle.
If a prisoner gets back to their community, they will most likely find said community has turned their back on them. This is evident in the fact that ex-convicts are only just starting to get access to services such as food stamps now. This is conditional and many states still don’t allow it at all. do not have access to food benefits such as food stamps. “An individual who is convicted or charged with a crime that is a felony is only eligible to receive [AFDC and FoodStamps] State Supplement or SNAP benefits when certain conditions are met.” (Rubin). Or that public housing often has not letting criminals into their house as part of their contracts and leases. “Generally, federal and state laws give public (i.e., housing authority) and private landlords discretion to reject applicants with a criminal record. In some cases, however, federal law requires federal housing authorities to reject individuals with certain criminal histories (e.g., methamphetamine production).” (Singer Bansal). In some cases, health care may also not be provided meaning they do not have forms of support for food, shelter, or care.
Let’s say in the best case scenario, an ex-con has someone to help get them home, a house to return to, and a way to get food on the table. To keep paying for those things, they’ll need a job. But most jobs have the question “Have you been to jail or charged with any crime” on their applications. This makes it extremely hard to get even an interview for a job, even for nonviolent offenders. This issue is exacerbated by parole meetings which often fall during working hours that can make it almost impossible to keep a job if gotten.
The issue of parole goes farther than work hours and meetings being difficult. “The remaining prison releasees — representing almost a quarter of the total release population (109,896–22.2 percent of all releasees) were sent back to the community ‘unconditionally,’ with no involvement of the state or federal government in overseeing their return to the community. That is, some type of supervised release (e.g., probation, parole, etc.) was not part of the reentry process.”(Bryne). This means 75% of the community had to pay for parole. Additionally those let out unconditionally were not eligible for any aid from grants and other programs within the system as they had no government assistance. It is also important to note that most of these cases came from an expiration of sentence. “In the vast majority of these unconditional release cases (95 percent), the offender was released from prison due to an expiration of sentence.” (Bryne). Ex-cons must pay to have parole officers; failure of which will result in a return to jail. “Often as a standard condition, individuals are also required to pay — and avoid delinquency — on a host of financial obligations, including criminal fines, court fees, and restitution. One common financial condition that is often overlooked, however, is the requirement to pay supervision fees (that is, fees that cover the costs of being on probation or parole). Additionally, probationers and parolees are often required to pay fees for programs (e.g., drug treatment programs) and other “services” required as supervision conditions. The combined expense of these various probation or parole related fees can be quite high and cause significant financial burdens, especially for those with limited income and employment opportunities.” (Ruhland). This means ex-cons often have to take illegal jobs in order to pay off their parole, leading to a terrible cycle of recidivism. Issues with parole are also one of the number one causes for repeat offenders. When faced with low job prospects, no housing, and no support for food insecurity, it is no wonder prisoners cannot also pay for parole and subsequent fees.
Recidivism rates come in at a staggering 50–65%. “The U.S. releases over 7 million people from jail and more than 600,000 people from prison each year. However, recidivism is common. Within 3 years of their release, 2 out of 3 people are rearrested and more than 50% are incarcerated again” (People). This is all while billions of dollars are being poured into the system. “The U.S. spends $81 billion a year on mass incarceration, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, and that figure might be an underestimate”(Kuhn). Obviously the prison reentry system is not working if it has such dismal rates of success. So what can be done about the issue? How is this fixed?
There are many areas that need to be addressed in order for the prison reentry system to improve. On an individual level, educating oneself and those around them can help break the stigma around ex-offenders. This is the easiest to complete as it takes no action from the government. By breaking said stigma, job prospects for this group of people would rise as well as compassion. In many cases, it is hard to treat people who have broken the law with any amount of empathy, but people cannot change if they are not given the opportunity. Keeping them down does nothing to better the community.
Another way to help on an individual level is by voting. There are certain programs in place such as the Second Chance Act that while well intentioned, are proving ineffective. “The federal “Second Chance Act of 2005” calls for expanding reentry services for people leaving prison, yet existing policies restrict access to needed services for those with criminal records.” (Pogorzelski). There are certain grants given to help people affected by this issue, but it is not well documented where the money actually goes and therefore it is hard to estimate the progress that has been done.
Alternative programs have been suggested. One example is a study done in — which effectively addressed what they consider the eight main concerns with the prison reentry system. “We have identified policy restrictions in 8 general categories: employment; housing; public assistance; education; parental fights, adoption, and foster care; driver’s licenses; voting and jury duty; and the expunging of the former prisoner’s criminal record. These domains have been referred to as components of the “social safety net” that could provide support for those recently released from prison which ensure better help from the government.” (Pogorzelski). But these changes have yet to be put in place. Many other alternatives have been suggested but have not even made it to the testing stage.
Programs that have been put in place on individual state levels have seen success such as a program providing legal service to ex-cons to help get them back on track, The Rutgers Federal Prisoner Reentry Project (RFPRP). “The creation of the RFPRP was spearheaded by U.S. District Court Judge Noel L. Hillman and represents a unique collaboration between the Rutgers School of Law (Camden) and the U.S. District Court and Probation Office in the District of New Jersey.” (Berger). These have been proven to be effective, such as in Truong’s case. “Truong was born in Vietnam in 1979. His father died before he was born and his mother brought him and his two siblings to the United States when he was 9 years old. He began using marijuana at age 24 and his drug use soon extended to include ecstasy. He held a variety of short-term jobs, including work in a meat-packing plant. He became involved in selling marijuana, however, and was released from prison in 2011 after serving a 60-month sentence. His problems became further compounded when, shortly following his release from custody, he lost his wallet, which contained all of his identification and his alien card. Upon applying for a new green card, he was told that one could not be issued, because he was under an ICE deportation order. However, since the United States lacks the appropriate treaty to deport to Vietnam people who immigrated to the United States in the 1980s, Truong was told by his ICE officer that his deportation was unlikely, thereby leaving him in a state of limbo in which he could not be granted a new alien registration card but could not be removed from the country, either. A referral was made to the RFPRP and the student attorneys assisted Truong in navigating the process to allow him to apply for employment authorization in lieu of a new green card. His work authorization was subsequently granted and shortly thereafter he obtained employment from a company that builds and installs decking and flooring, a position he has held for the past two years.” (Berger) There are many other stories like Truong’s that prove positive change is possible. This problem can be solved with the right steps in place.
The point of the justice system is to punish accordingly and see justice through. It is not to ruin the lives of those who don’t deserve it. If they have served their time, they do not deserve to be prosecuted on the outside. If they do deserve to be prosecuted, then they shouldn’t be outside of jail. The prison reentry system has a variety of issues like lack of support, issues finding jobs, food insecurity, inaccessible low income housing, parole issues, and ineffective laws and programs in place. To solve these problems, many things can be done. The most important being on a personal level of educating everyone and destigmatizing the idea of having ex-criminals, most often nonviolent ones, in society. Other things such as better programs being enforced by the government and voting in support of these issues in local polls are the next big steps. While jail should not be a walk in the park, it also should not be life ending for low level criminals with minimal charges. I am turning 18 in two months, and instead of fearing the legal system and prison reentry, I am going to use my voting rights and voice to help change it, which is what we all should aim to do.
Works Cited
Bahr, Stephen J., et al. “The Reentry Process: How Parolees Adjust to Release from Prison.” Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research & Practice about Men as Fathers, vol. 3, no. 3, Fall 2005, pp. 243–65. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/10.3149/fth.0303.243.
Basile, Vincent D. “A Model for Developing a Reentry Program.” Federal Probation, vol. 66, no. 3, Dec. 2002, p. 55. EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-com.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,cpid&custid=s8517493&db=aph&AN=9210563&site=eds-live.
Berger, Todd A., and Joseph A. DaGrossa. “Overcoming Legal Barriers to Reentry: A Law School-Based Approach to Providing Legal Services to the Reentry Community.” Federal Probation, vol. 77, no. 1, June 2013, pp. 1–8. EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-com.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,cpid&custid=s8517493&db=aph&AN=89332146&site=eds-live..
Byrne, James M., and Faye S. Taxman. “Targeting for Reentry: Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria Across Eight Model Programs.” Federal Probation, vol. 68, no. 2, Sept. 2004, pp. 53–61. EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-com.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,cpid&custid=s8517493&db=aph&AN=16432709&site=eds-live.
Cornish, Trent, and Jay Whetzel. “Location Monitoring for Low-Risk Inmates — A Cost-Effective and Evidence-Based Reentry Strategy.” Federal Probation, vol. 78, no. 1, June 2014, pp. 1–4. EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-com.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,cpid&custid=s8517493&db=aph&AN=97060033&site=eds-live.
“Factors For Recidivism Or Criminal Behavior.” Missouri Department Of Corrections, 2021, https://doc.mo.gov/programs/missouri-reentry-proces. 5/25/22
“Jail Reentry” National Institute Of Corrections, 2022, https://info.nicic.gov/tjc/module-3-section-3-developing-reentry-implementation-committee. 5/2522.
Kuhn, Casey. “The U.S. Spends Billions to Lock People up, but Very Little to Help Them Once They’re Released.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, 7 Apr. 2021, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/the-u-s-spends-billions-to-lock-people-up-but-very-little-to-help-them-once-theyre-released#:~:text=The%20U.S.%20spends%20%2481%20billion,families%20is%20roughly%20%24182%20billion.
Mellow, Jeff, and Kevin Barnes-Ceeney. “Key Factors to Promote Successful Comprehensive Reentry Initiatives.” Federal Probation, vol. 81, no. 3, Dec. 2017, pp. 22–31. EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-com.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,cpid&custid=s8517493&db=aph&AN=127846420&site=eds-live.
Mijs, Jonathan J. B. “The Missing Organizational Dimension of Prisoner Reentry: An Ethnography of the Road to Reentry at a Nonprofit Service Provider.” Sociological Forum, vol. 31, no. 2, June 2016, pp. 291–309. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/socf.12254.
People, Healthy. “Incarceration.” Incarceration | Healthy People 2020, Office Of Disease Prevention And Health Promotion, 2020, https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topics-objectives/topic/social-determinants-health/interventions-resources/incarceration.
Petersilia, Joan. “What Works in Prisoner Reentry? Reviewing and Questioning the Evidence.” Federal Probation, vol. 68, no. 2, Sept. 2004, pp. 4–8. EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-com.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,cpid&custid=s8517493&db=aph&AN=16432672&site=eds-live.
Petersilia, Joan. “When Prisoners Return to the Community: Political, Economic, and Social Consequences.” Corrections Management Quarterly, vol. 5, no. 3, June 2001, pp. 1–10. EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-com.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,cpid&custid=s8517493&db=mfi&AN=24275051&site=eds-live.
Pogorzelski, Wendy, et al. “Behavioral Health Problems, Ex-Offender Reentry Policies, and the ‘Second Chance Act.’” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 95, no. 10, Oct. 2005, pp. 1718–24. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/10.2105/AJPH.2005.065805
Rubin, Joseph. “Www.cga.ct.gov.” Connecticut Department Of Social Services Uniform Policy Manual, Connecticut Department Of Social Services Uniform Policy Manual, 4 Oct. 2012, https://www.cga.ct.gov/2012/rrdata/pr/2012REG2012-022-RC.PDF.
Ruhland, Ebony. “The Impact of Fees and Fines for Individuals on Probation and Parole.” Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 23 May 2016, https://robinainstitute.umn.edu/news-views/impact-fees-and-fines-individuals-probation-and-parole.
Seiter, Richard P. “Prisoner Reentry and the Role of Parole Officers.” Federal Probation, vol. 66, no. 3, Dec. 2002, p. 50. EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-com.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,cpid&custid=s8517493&db=mfi&AN=9210562&site=eds-live.
Seiter, Richard P. “Prisoner Reentry: An Old Issue, With New Problems.” Corrections Management Quarterly, vol. 5, no. 3, June 2001, p. iv. EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-com.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,cpid&custid=s8517493&db=mfi&AN=24275060&site=eds-live.
Singer Bansal, Julia. “Updated Report: Housing for Adults with Criminal Records.” Office of Legislative Research, Office of Legislative Research, 11 Feb. 2016, https://cga.ct.gov/2016/rpt/pdf/2016-R-0023.pdf.
“Six Vital Areas Of Life Support” Prison Fellowship, 2021, https://www.prisonfellowship.org/resources/training-resources/reentry-ministry/ministry-tools-2/six-vital-areas-of-life-support/. 5/25/2022
USDJ. “Prisoners and Prisoner Re-Entry.” USDOJ: FBCI: Prisoners and Prisoner Re-Entry, United States Department of Justice, 2022, https://www.justice.gov/archive/fbci/progmenu_reentry.html.
Wall II, Ashbel T., and Tracey Z. Poole. “Partnerships With Local Law Enforcement and Community Agencies: A Critical Component to Successful Prisoner Reentry Initiatives.” Corrections Today, vol. 70, no. 2, Apr. 2008, pp. 30–37. EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-com.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,cpid&custid=s8517493&db=mfi&AN=32061512&site=eds-live.
Wilkinson, Reginald A. “Offender Reentry: A Storm Overdue.” Corrections Management Quarterly, vol. 5, no. 3, June 2001, pp. 46–51. EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-com.porterslibrary.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,cpid&custid=s8517493&db=mfi&AN=24275056&site=eds-live.
