by Georgia Center for Opportunity | Jun 25, 2014
Below is a guest blog by Jesse Wiese, Policy Analyst at Justice Fellowship, the legislative advocacy arm of Prison Fellowship Ministries.
Image Credit: Molly Rowan Leach/Feverpitched. All Rights Reserved. Found at Transformation.
For decades America has taken a “tough-on-crime” approach to criminal justice. This philosophy has generated little in the way of positive results and has resulted in burgeoning state budgets, overcrowded prisons, and low success rates. States are beginning to understand that we cannot incarcerate ourselves out of the problem of crime and recidivism. Fortunately, lawmakers are beginning to shift from a “tough-on-crime” approach and focus more on the science of criminology, or evidence-based-practices. This shift, however, is motivated predominantly by shrinking state budgets and the need to reduce the rising cost of corrections.
These reforms, while positive, do not go far enough. If we want to realize lasting change within the criminal justice system, we must do more than trim state budgets, institute new programs, or provide staff training — though these actions offer a good starting point. What is needed is a paradigm shift. We as a society need an altering of the lens through which we view crime, the men and women who commit it, and the victims and communities it affects. For a criminal justice system to be truly effective, it must recognize the broken moral foundations which lead to crime and provide a philosophical basis that perpetuates and restores the notions of human dignity and value.
Restorative justice addresses inefficiencies of the status quo and offers solutions that can provide lasting and refreshing change. By placing the victim at the center of the case, restorative justice places government in its rightful role as a facilitator of justice rather than a direct party. More importantly, restorative justice prioritizes victim participation, promotes offender responsibility, and cultivates community engagement. Identifying the needs and responsibilities of these three parties — victims, offenders, and community — is the fuel to realizing restorative outcomes and can be summed up in the following three questions:
First, do the victims and survivors of the criminal act have the right and opportunity to be validated and restored? Under the current system, the proper status of victims and survivors is usurped by the government’s unbalanced role of both victim and prosecutor. Restorative justice promotes the need for victims to be consistently considered throughout the criminal justice process. Although criminal acts often result in damages that can never be fully restored, victims and survivors have legal rights that should be enforced. Victims and survivors of crime may also need help regaining a sense of safety and control over their lives and assistance with damages they suffer, material or otherwise.
Second, are offenders given a fair process, proportionate and definitive punishment, and the expectation and opportunity to make amends? Restorative justice requires that the criminal justice system do more than warehouse people convicted of crimes. By holding men and women accountable for the harm they have caused to their victims and communities, the restorative justice process requires these men and women to take the necessary steps toward making amends and rebuilding trust within their communities. With the goal that those convicted of a crime are treated with dignity and fairness, restorative justice can ensure that punishments delivered will be proportional to the harm caused by the offense. Through this approach offenders are offered an opportunity for a fresh start, even if incarceration is necessary.
Third, is community safety improved and do communities play a role in restoring victims and those who have completed criminal punishment? Because crime affects communities by eroding public safety and confidence, disrupting order, and undermining common values, communities need to play an integral role in the restoration process. Additionally, communities can actively work to support victims and survivors of crime and help to facilitate the reintegration of those who have completed their criminal punishment. Government should, in turn, promote safety through proven crime reduction practices and the promotion of community education and solutions.
As a society, we have begun to consider the consequences of a “tough-on-crime” approach to criminal justice. Fortunately, there seems to be wide ranging support across both the political and religious spectrums for moving toward a system of restorative justice. However, the much-needed restorative justice reforms will only take place if citizens like you and me speak up, join together, and advocate for change.
You can do so by joining the Justice Fellowship Network. You will be kept up-to-date about reforms that advance restorative justice principles in your state and given opportunities to advocate for those reforms.
by Georgia Center for Opportunity | Jun 6, 2014
Prison is not typically the place where men openly share their feelings with each other, for fear of coming across as soft. However, several GCO team members experienced something markedly different while sitting-in on a fatherhood class at Clayton County Transitional Center.[i]
Reflecting on this experience, Breakthrough Fellow Michael Schulte writes:
It was wonderful to see the men open up as they spoke about their children, sharing their names, ages, and where they live now. One man had been away from his two kids for 14 years, and I could see by looking at his face how much it pained him. Many of these men are hopeful for the chance to simply be around their children again.
The fatherhood class is run by It Takes a Village Today (ITAVT), a non-profit whose name is derived from an ancient African proverb emphasizing community responsibility in the upbringing of children. As such, its mission is to preserve children and ensure they have a good upbringing through instilling the values of fatherhood within the men who will be returning to their families from prison.
The class provides a number of important services to the men including offering instruction on what it means to be a good father, helping noncustodial parents identify existing child support orders, and providing assistance in legitimizing children.
Concerning legitimation, Breakthrough Fellow Aundrea Gregg writes:
I was quite astounded by the number of men with unknown numbers of kids – men in need of help discovering once and for all who belongs to them. For fathers hopeful to build stronger relationships with their children, uncertainty of paternity can have serious implications…Any man wishing to gain rights to custody, visitation, or even have their children take their last name must complete the legitimation process…It Takes a Village…provide[s] the legal support that is needed for participants of the program to take paternity tests, file voluntary parental acknowledgement forms, and complete the legitimation process.
In addition to providing practical help, the class offers a forum for the men to speak openly about their children, share their goals as fathers, and reflect upon their own upbringing. Katherine Greene, Program Specialist with GCO, was particularly impacted as the men reflected on what sort of fathers they had while growing up. She explains:
One of the facilitators…asked two thought provoking questions: ‘What was your father like and how do you compare to him?’ Most of their responses surprised me. Many of them described their fathers as being positive role models in their lives. In the words of one inmate, ‘My father was a loving man. He was protective and very strict. He was present in my life. I just made some bad decisions which landed me in here.’ His words, among others who shared that day, really resonated with me.
Each of the GCO team members in attendance left the class feeling privileged to have learned about the men’s lives and were moved by the experience. Patrick Kaiser, Senior Manager of Research and Development, summed up the visit in the following words:
I think everyone should have a similar experience to see that these men are not like criminals portrayed in the media. Rather, they are men who have faced daunting challenges in their lives, made mistakes in how they tackled these challenges, and are looking to make amends for their errors and become positive community members. Many of these men were failed by their communities as children and young adults. We must not fail them again.
[i] Offenders entering transitional centers in Georgia typically have 6-12 months remaining in their sentence.
by Georgia Center for Opportunity | Apr 18, 2014
Crime needs to be punished. There is no doubt about that. Punishment for crime is a necessary part of maintaining a just society, preserving order and peace, and promoting life and happiness. Citizens need to know that there are consequences for breaking the law and to be motivated to do what is right for the good of society.
While punishment for crime is necessary, it also needs to be dispensed justly. Overly punitive measures can demoralize offenders and their families and cause them to lose faith in the criminal justice system.
Take mandatory minimum sentencing for drug offenses, for instance. This sentencing began in the 1980’s as a way for state officials to get “tough on crime.” However, it stripped judges of the ability to use discretion in sentencing drug offenders, resulting in scores of people spending far too many years behind bars for relatively minor drug offenses. This “tough on crime” mentality led to a massive overcrowding of our nation’s prisons, more costs to taxpayers, and increased recidivism.
When thinking about punishing offenders for their crimes, we must remember that 95 percent of those who enter prison will return to the community at some point. In other words, “today’s prisoners are tomorrow’s neighbors.”[i]
This reality should cause us to approach how we administer justice with a more balanced and humane perspective. We ought to be thinking with the end in mind: How best can we prepare a person for reentry at the moment of sentencing? What obstacles does a person need to overcome personally? Who does this person need to make amends with before he is released? What will keep this person from recidivating?
It is important that we remember that those who have committed crimes are people, and all people have inherent dignity and worth. If we allow ourselves to view a person as less than human, we are tempted to write him off and to refuse to engage in the hard work of helping him to overcome root issues that keep him from thriving. However, if we see those who commit offenses as humans worthy of the same dignity as any other human being, we will be more likely to see their possibility for redemption.
When we examine our own lives – our failings and the consequences of bad choices that we’ve made – we can learn to relate to offenders and have compassion on them. It should show us that just as we have been shown mercy at various points in our lives and given the chance to move forward, criminal offenders likewise could benefit from being shown mercy. This does not mean that we should forgo punishing justly according to the nature of one’s offense, but it should temper the manner in which we approach punishing crime and cause us to reexamine the ultimate outcomes we are trying to achieve. This paradigm shift should cause us to realize that the offender’s restoration to one’s victims, family, and community, is a better aim for our criminal justice system than merely punishment.
A better approach seems to be one that recognizes that crimes are fundamentally committed against other people, not simply the state. The harm one person inflicts upon another needs to be addressed and repaired as best as possible. Simply locking a person away and having the state deal with him is not going to address the needs of the victim, the offender, or the community. A deeper reconciliation is needed.
A criminal justice system that reflects this restorative approach would be far more likely to cultivate a humane and just society.
by Georgia Center for Opportunity | Apr 14, 2014
Governor Deal signed the criminal justice reform bill, SB 365, into law this past Sunday at Antioch Baptist Church in Gainesville.
This special morning service marked an important milestone for prisoner reentry reform in Georgia and is a testament to the extensive collaboration that has taken place over the last year from the state level down to the community level.
The state has zeroed-in on criminal justice reform for three years now, passing important legislation to improve adult sentencing (2012 and 2013), juvenile justice (2013), and prisoner reentry (2014). The first two reforms were projected to save the state $264 million over a five-year-period, as an increasing number of non-violent offenders are released from prison and placed under community supervision. This move allows expensive prison beds to be reserved for those who pose the greatest threat to society, while providing those with drug addictions and mental health issues the opportunity to receive needed treatment in the community.
Already, the outcome of these reforms has been significant – the state’s prison population has dropped from 57,295 to 53,000 offenders in just two short years, saving the state an estimated $21,000 per inmate per year.
The Governor is hopeful that we will see the same sort of progress made in the realm of prisoner reentry as SB 365 takes effect. This bill makes three important reforms that will assist ex-offenders in obtaining employment:
- It mandates that private background check agencies update their criminal history information on a monthly basis and permanently delete any records that have been restricted or of persons who have been exonerated (absolved from guilt);
- It provides employers a certain level of protection from negligent liability hiring by exercising due care in hiring ex-offenders who have received a Program and Treatment Completion Certificate or a pardon;
- It gives judges discretion in determining whether an offender’s license should be suspended or not for a non-driving-related drug offense.
The success of this reform will be measured with a decreased recidivism rate and increased employment rate among offenders returning to their communities.
Georgia Center for Opportunity is proud to have played a role in influencing the recommendations made by the Georgia Council of Criminal Justice Reform to the state legislature in January 2014, which ultimately made their way into SB 365. GCO has been researching this issue over the past year-and-a-half and believes the state is taking the right approach in working to provide offenders greater access to job opportunities.
Hopefully new bills introduced in subsequent legislative sessions will implement the remaining recommendations made by the Criminal Justice Reform Council on ways to improve the reintegration of offenders in Georgia.
Read more about the signing of this important reform in the Gainesville Times, posted April 14, 2014: http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/section/6/article/98202/ .
by Georgia Center for Opportunity | Mar 8, 2014
Yesterday, Georgia Justice Project (GJP) hosted a lobby day at the Capitol which aimed to “enhance the chance” for Georgians with a criminal record to find employment. Concerned advocates traveled from as far as far as Albany to the State Capitol to voice their support for SB 365, a bill which captures a number of recommendations made by the Governor’s Special Council on Criminal Justice Reform to increase employment opportunities for ex-offenders (read the report here).
Before the 125+ advocates who attended the GJP’s Lobby Day met with legislators, the team at GJP provided a brief run-down of what the bill says, how the legislative process works, and what to say when talking with one’s legislator. Information packets were handed out explaining the nuts and bolts of SB 365, making it as easy as possible for participants to advocate for the recommendations made in the bill.
It a nutshell, SB 365 makes three important reforms that will assist ex-offenders in obtaining employment: (1) It mandates that private background check agencies update their criminal history information on a monthly basis and permanently delete any records that have been restricted or of persons who have been exonerated (absolved from guilt); (2) It protects employers from being accused of negligent hiring if they hire ex-offenders who have received a Program and Treatment Completion Certificate or a pardon; (3) It gives judges discretion in determining whether an offender’s license should be suspended or not for a non-driving-related drug offense.
After the brief orientation, advocates headed to the House Chamber to speak with their representatives. Staff at GJP and other volunteers instructed advocates on how to page their legislator at the ropes outside of the chamber in order to speak with them.
I had the chance to speak with Rep. Tom Rice (R-95) from Norcross about SB 365. Rep. Rice spoke in favor of the bill and mentioned that he has seen virtually no opposition to it in the House. His remarks confirm what we saw in the Senate last Thursday, February 26, as the bill passed unanimously with a vote of 53-0. The bipartisan support for this bill is strong as both parties acknowledge the importance of removing unnecessary obstacles to employment for those who carry a criminal record.
GJP’s Lobby Day at the Capitol finished as Executive Director Jay Neal of the Governor’s Office of Transition, Support, and Reentry addressed the group of advocates who participated in the effort. He expressed his appreciation for people coming out to voice their support for reforms that will improve the lives of those who carry a criminal record. Neal, who is passionate about this issue, shared with the group the effort that the Governor’s Office is putting forth to improve the reentry strategy in communities across the state. He mentioned that Georgia has done in four months what it took Michigan to do in two years – a state that is largely regarded as a national leader in recidivism reduction. Georgia has been to do this because of the broad support these reforms have received from the top-down.
Neal shared with the group that nine years ago the state had 64,000 people in prison or in jail. Today, this population has been reduced to 55,000 people – a savings of nearly $190 million to the state (the average cost of incarcerating a person in Georgia is $21,039 per year). Furthermore, of the 9,000 people released over this time period, 1,000 people were released in just the past month. The majority of these releases are low-level, non-violent offenders who are better-off receiving treatment under community supervision than within prison. These reductions allow the state to reserve expensive prison beds for offenders who pose the greatest threat to public safety.
Much of the success that the state has experienced in reducing prison costs and increasing public safety has taken place through recommendations made by the Criminal Justice Reform Council during the past three years. The council’s recommendations have served as a powerful guide for realigning Georgia’s criminal justice system with evidence-based practices nationwide.
As statewide collaboration continues to take place from the Governor’s office to local community service providers, there is good reason to believe that Georgia will continue to see positive outcomes in offender reentry in the coming years.
by Georgia Center for Opportunity | Mar 3, 2014
For many prisoners reentering society, debts and the inability to save money while in prison create serious obstacles to a successful transition. This debt usually comes in the form of child support arrears, restitution, and various court fines and fees that result from their conviction.
Photo courtesy of pixabay.com In
Georgia, offenders are released from prison with only $25, a change of clothes, and a bus ticket. Meanwhile, they may likely carry tens of thousands of dollars in debt as well as the mark of a criminal record, making their prospects of securing a job and housing very difficult.
Because of this fact, offenders usually struggle to provide for their own basic needs upon release, much less service the debt they have incurred as a result of their felony. These offenders transition from a place where all their basic needs were provided by the state, to a situation where their subsistence depends largely upon their ability to get a job. Having been out of the job market for potentially several years, simply affording rent payments, buying food and clothing, and covering transportation expenses can be remarkably difficult. Often additional liabilities, such as child support payments, make circumstances even more difficult, leaving an offender little to no money to spare for the repayment of debts.
Still the demand placed upon offenders to repay their debts and obligations is high, and the penalty for not complying can be stiff. A person under parole supervision in Georgia can be revoked and re-incarcerated for failure to pay child support, restitution, or parole supervision costs.[i] An offender may not be intentionally avoiding paying these costs, but simply not have the means to do so – especially when they have spent the last several years in prison with no means of earning income.
As a result, an inordinate amount of debt can discourage offenders from making current payments (i.e. child support), encourage them to seek illegitimate sources of income, or lead them to abscond.[ii] These responses are harmful for all stakeholders in the community, as unpaid debt and obligations leave children and mothers without financial support, victims lacking financial compensation, and taxpayers burdened with the cost of debt collection, legal fees, and re-incarceration. Moreover, such responses inhibit offenders’ rehabilitation by preventing them from amending past actions and accepting current roles and responsibilities within their families and communities.
It is important for the state to consider how various debts and obligations present unique barriers for offenders reentering society, and to work where feasible to remove those that are unnecessarily punitive. In this way, the state could encourage offenders to meet current obligations and develop a realistic plan for repaying what is owed.
Endnotes
[i] Jake Arbes, “How Parole Works in Georgia,” Jake Arbes Attorney at Law, accessed March 3, 2014, http://www.arbeslaw.com/how-parole-works.html.
[ii] Vicki Teretsky, Staying in Jobs and Out of the Underground: Child Support Policies that Encourage Legitimate Work, CLASP Policy Brief, March 2007.
Page 7 of 8« First«...45678»
