An Open Letter to the Federal Bureau of Prisons

To The Federal Bureau of Prisons: My name is Ashley, and I am a student at a Daly City charter school. In my English class, we have been analyzing the nature of evil through articles, fictional stories, and Socratics. Throughout this project, I realized that United States prison system is in need of serious assistance. According to an article by CNN, the United States has the highest incarceration rate, however, the United States has the third highest population in the world. That’s not a good ratio, right? Since laws and police enforcement can’t hinder people from breaking laws, the next part to change people is at prison. By reforming the prison system, less people will go to jail and/or reoffend. We can prevent that. And how would that happen? All we need is just your help and support. Therefore, based on my research, I believe that the United States prison and justice system should be reformed to a restorative justice process because restorative justice assists the offender in becoming a productive member to society and helps the victim get the support they need.

To start, the United States prison system should be changed to some sort of restorative justice so that the offender can learn to not reoffend and become a productive member in society. In the United States incarceration population, many of the people reoffend. But compared to other countries, there is a significantly lower number of re-offenders. You may ask, why does that happen with the United States? Well, it might have something to do with our prison system. Since there is obviously a significant difference between our prison system compared to other countries, an article by CNN was written about a Norway prison that seems to be doing something right, since the recidivism rate is much lower. According to John Sutter, a CNN senior investigative reporter, in his work titled “Welcome To The World’s Nicest Prison”, he writes, “Only 20% of prisoners who come through Norway’s prisons re-offend within two years of being released, according to a 2010 report commissioned by the governments of several Nordic countries […] compare that with the three-year re-offense rate for state prisons in the U.S.: 43%, according to a 2011 report from the Pew Center on the States, a nonpartisan research group.” Do you see that? That’s almost two times less than the United States’ recidivism rate. TWO TIMES. Prisons should be there to help offenders to learn not to commit crimes anymore. So what could our prison system be doing wrong? Let’s take a look at the same CNN article about Bastoy, the Norwegian prison with the lowest recidivism rate of 16%. In that article, Sutter writes, “Everyone at Bastoy has a job, and prisoners must report to work from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. weekdays. Some people garden; others farm. Some chop down trees […] others tend to a team of horses, which are used to cart wood and supplies from one part of the island to another. Everyone moves about freely during these tasks. Guards are sometimes present, sometimes not. No one wears shackles or electronic monitoring bracelets.The idea is for prison to function like a small, self-sustaining village.” In Bastoy, there is much freedom for the prisoners, which can help them learn from their old ways. By teaching the prisoners what they could be doing that is both beneficial for themselves and others, they can bring out the best in themselves, instead of focusing on the worst. In addition, by giving them some sort of responsibility during their prison sentence, they can feel as if they matter and that they are capable of better things. If our prison system actually worked to help the offenders like Norway’s prisons, the recidivism rate would be much lower, leading to a society made of beneficial people. Bastoy is based on a form of restorative justice, and if it seems to work for Norwegians, it should work for Americans, which is why our prison system should be reformed to a restorative justice system.

Furthermore, the United States prison system should be changed to a restorative justice so that the victim can actually be helped. In punitive justice, the victim is often not able to get the closure they need to move on from the traumatic event caused by the offender. Closure can be in the form of an apology or making sure that the offender won’t hurt anybody else. However, in punitive justice, the victims don’t have the opportunity to be able to meet with offender. Wouldn’t you want the victim to be able to leave the disturbing events behind? You may say, “There’s no way that that would actually work.” But, there are many instances in which a meeting actually helped the victim. In the BBC article “Restorative Justice: How I Got An Apology From My Abuser”, Adam Eley writes, “Since the meeting, Laura says “a weight has been lifted” off her shoulders. “I wanted an apology, and I got one. An apology is one word, but it’s a massive thing,” she says. “I’m not as angry anymore — that’s lifted. And hearing him say that it was all his fault was massive. I didn’t believe that until I heard it from him, and no-one else would have been able to convince me. ‘Without restorative justice I’d have struggled to move on with my life. I also had the chance to say goodbye to him, which was what I wanted.’” In that quote, the victim describes her experience with restorative justice in the form of a meeting. In that meeting, she finally got her apology and the closure she needed to move on. She can now move on with her life and live it without the incident hindering her from any opportunities she may have. Without restorative justice, she would have had unanswered questions and her mental illness could have worsened. Her chains that were put on by the offender were finally lifted. Don’t you want people to be able to live their life freely? Isn’t that what our country was built on? Isn’t that a right in our country? Everybody has the right to pursuit of happiness, which could sometimes be achieved by getting closure. In addition, restorative justice meetings have also helped other victims in the UK. In this article by the Restorative Justice Council, it summarizes the findings from a UK restorative justice study, which was conducted by the Ministry of Justice, a government department. In that article, it states, “​The majority of victims chose to participate in face to face meetings with the offender, when offered by a trained facilitator. 85% of victims who took part were satisfied with the process.” This data was from a study conducted by the UK in which face to face meetings were used as a form of restorative justice with adult offenders. In that study, it states that 85% of victims were satisfied with the meeting. That is pretty close to 100%, which means that restorative justice DOES work. Therefore, restorative justice should be implemented because it helps not just offenders, but also victims.

On the other hand, some might argue that restorative justice puts an expectation that victims should talk to those who harmed them. For example, in an article by the University of San Diego, president and founding member of the Quebec Victims Advocacy Association, Arlène Gaudreault, asks a quite important question. She asks, “Is conversation always desired?” That question references to the thought of whether all victims would want to confront their abuser, which makes restorative seem like an obligation. However, restorative justice is not forced, but rather that most victims would like to meet with their offender in order to change them for the better. By changing them for the better, the offender can learn to not hurt others. The victim can then move on because they can know now that the offender has learned from their mistakes. In addition, if one of the points of restorative justice is to help the victim, why would we force them into doing something that they don’t want to do? That is in no way helping them rehabilitate. According to an article written by Mikhail Lyubansky Ph.D, a University of Illinois psychology professor, he states, “It is important that no one is forced to participate in a restorative process if they don’t want to do so. It is also important to understand that those who have been harmed often want to do so because they want those who did the harm to understand the impact of their actions or they want to have dialogue that creates conditions for the harm to stop.” That means that victims should be given the opportunity to meet with their offender, since that can get them closure. That closure can then lead to happiness, which according to the Declaration of Independence, is a right that is given to everybody. Therefore, restorative justice can still help both the offender and the victim, as long as they are both willing to participate.

As a result, I implore you to change the United States prison system to incorporate more restorative practices. Restorative practices can be meetings between tween the offender and victim, more rehabilitation, and responsibilities. This will make a difference because by doing so, it will help lower the recidivism rate for offenders and rehabilitate victims. All in all, it will eventually lead to a more safer, functional society, which is what we all want to achieve, right? Thank you for listening to my opinion.

Best Regards,

Ashley