Community Building

I don’t know how many of you remember studies of early Western Civilization, but on the pages of a history book that’s circulating I read a passage describing the early Greeks. As founders of the first known city, the Greeks recognized the importance of community building. They would say:

                “To live the good life, one must live in a great city.”

A great city, those early Greeks recognized, was made up of community. And a community is made up of active participation from many. The more parts of the community that contribute, the greater the community becomes.

I asked for the privilege of speaking this morning with hopes of encouraging you to join this effort that Larry, George and Dr. Gooey lead—under the benevolent sponsorship of Ms. Oliver—to build a thriving community in Taft Camp with its Monday morning Toastmaster Club. And in the spirit of community building, I’d like to offer a simple acronym that might remind us to do everything within our power to build a high-energy Toastmaster Club. That acronym is APE — A-P-E. It begins with “A”, for attitude.

When I talk about attitude, I’m referring to inner motivation. In prison, it’s sometimes a challenge to muster energy. Prisoners are separated from family, and as the days turn into weeks, the weeks into months, and the months into years, monotony can be crippling.

The best antidote and our greatest weapons for that lethargy exist in our hearts and in our minds—because our hearts and minds provide the arsenal of attitude. It is attitude that gets us up in the morning and gives us the spirit to triumph over the challenges we face. With the right attitude, we don’t just show up or toe the line. Attitude empowers us to welcome every opportunity to improve, to become better, to live a great life. And a great life begins with a great community—one we can further with our Toastmasters Club.

That leads me to P, which stands for preparation.

Great communities don’t materialize by accident. They require planning, preparation, performance. As Toastmasters, we can motivate ourselves by thinking about contributions we can make for next week’s meeting. Instead of hoping that Larry or others in our group’s leadership won’t call upon you to speak, come with a “can-do” attitude and an energy that shows your enthusiasm. Ask not what your Toastmaster Club can do for you, but what you can do for your Toastmaster Club.

One preparation suggestion might be to write a series of topics you’d like to share with the group. That’s the start of preparation. Look at the list of potential speeches frequently throughout the week. Develop ideas on how you might educate our group in an informative, motivating, or persuasive presentation. Those preparations will endow you with valuable skills, and they will enrich everyone in Taft’s Toastmaster community.

The third letter of the three letter acronym is E, and it stands for excellence.

By beginning every day with the right attitude, we can live on a journey of constant and continuous preparation for excellence. Those personal pursuits become virtues, contributing not only to a more dynamic Toastmasters Club, but endowing us with the skill to fill voids in our lives, bringing meaning wherever we are, with whatever challenges we face.

To become skillful speakers, we must work on our attitudes, we must prepare, and we must pursue excellence.  That’s A-P-E.

Live with the attitude for success, with a commitment to prepare, with a constant pursuit of excellence in this community building effort. 

The post Community Building appeared first on Prison News Blog.

Why I read Writing With Style:

This was the second of two books on writing style that Peggy, a professor of English from Nevada sent for me to read. I met Peggy through a written correspondence that her husband, Steve, made possible. Peggy has helped me by reviewing chapters of my manuscript, Earning Freedom, as well as another chapter I wrote for a corrections book. Her comments helped me strengthen the work, and I read these books on style she sent because I hoped they would help me improve my writing skills.

What I learned from reading Writing With Style:

Although many technical rules govern the craft of writing, style helps writing flow more smoothly. I learn from reading authors critically, by considering choices in punctuation, paragraphing, cadence, word choice, sentence lengths, and other decisions writers make in expressing their ideas. This book offered suggestions that may help my writing come across more smoothly, at least that’s what I’m hoping.

Reading books like Writing With Style and Style make me more conscious of rules that govern writing. They also reaffirm my thoughts about writing – that writing is work, a job that requires many hours. I enjoy the work of writing , as I find it a creative and a fulfilling use of my time. Writing helps me think more clearly.

How reading Writing With Style will help me upon release:

Writing With Style adds to my continuing education on improving my communication skills. While living in prison, I’ve found that developing communication skills requires a constant effort, as the rules of confinement separate us from society in many ways. Without effort, a prisoner loses his communication skills over time. His vocabulary becomes polluted with profanity and vulgar expressions. By studying books on English, however, prisoners can improve their eloquence and skills at persuasion. This book has helped my ongoing efforts to improve my communication skills.

The post Writing With Style appeared first on Prison News Blog.

With hopes of helping other prisoners enjoy more successful adjustments following release from prison, I’d like to share what I learned from Rick, an obviously bright man who had significant earning potential.

Rick was the epitome of a self-made entrepreneur. Despite his not having a gold-plated academic pedigree or family wealth, he built a seven-figure net worth by raising capital for various business ventures, marketing, and offering consulting services. When he was in his early 40s, however, a violation of securities laws resulted in Rick’s being investigated for mail fraud. Wanting to clear his name and put the matter behind him, Rick said that he cooperated fully. After pleading guilty to a single count of mail fraud, he reported to a federal prison camp to serve his 33 month sentence.

A combination of good time credit, halfway house, and time off for completion of the Bureau of Prisons’ Residential Drug Awareness Program (RDAP), meant that Rick could complete requirements for the prison portion of his sentence in 16 months; he would follow release from prison with six months in a halfway house. Such opportunities inspired hope. Rick could see the end, or the possibility for a new beginning, and he adjusted accordingly.

While serving his initial sentence in the prison camp, Rick worked full time as an orderly for the Receiving and Discharge department. He exercised religiously, organized activities, tutored other prisoners, and complied with all prison expectations. He focused on making the best use of his time so he could return to society, complete the requirements on his three-year term of supervised release, and resurrect his career as a prosperous entrepreneur.

After 16 months passed, Rick walked out of federal prison camp a quasi free man. He reported to his assigned halfway house and listened as the administrator laid down expectations. While in the halfway house Rick remained beholden to the BOP rules. The terms of his early release required Rick to sit through classes on drug aftercare, with which he complied even though he thought them an unnecessary nuisance in his particular case.

With the strict conditions of the halfway house, Rick made the personal decision to give authorities the impression that he would accept a nondescript adjustment with his return to society. He didn’t want any attention devoted to him and thought the best way to complete his term in the halfway house, along with his three years of supervised release, would require him to live as low-key as possible.

Other men with whom Rick served time in prison and in the halfway house influenced his adjustment decision. From them, Rick heard that federal probation officers resented felons who came out of prison to lives of affluence and opportunity. The people who would supervise Rick’s release, he came to believe, would not want him to engage in business transactions, provide investment advice, consult, or participate in other ventures that he felt qualified to pursue. Rather than pushing matters, Rick said that he decided to comply with employment expectations he believed probation officers thought were appropriate for people who were released from prison.

Rick accepted a job that would pay him $10 per hour with a marketing company that an acquaintance operated, and he structured his life in a manner that would reflect that he was living within his means. Rather than requiring his wife and family to sacrifice their affluent lifestyle, Rick set up separate housing for himself in an apartment that would be consistent with his $10 per hour earnings. Although the probation officer could micromanage Rick’s life, he did not want his troubles with the criminal justice system spilling over to his family. Until he completed his three years of supervised release, Rick wanted to be invisible, or forgettable, as far as concerned his probation officer.

Once Rick completed the halfway house portion of his sentence, he moved his personal belongings into the apartment he rented. He kept the utilities in his name, and he slept in the apartment each night. Early each morning Rick would visit his wife in the home where she lived with their youngest son. After the visit, Rick would report to work at the marketing company, though his responsibilities suggested he was worth far more than the nominal wage.

Although Rick did not have an equity interest in any business venture, and he did not personally receive any type of compensation besides his $10-per-hour wage, Rick was directly responsible for tens of millions of dollars in annual revenues. His elder son, who was 22, set up a marketing company that received millions of dollars in annual revenues. Rick could file technically legitimate monthly reports with his probation officer that suggested he was a $400-per-week employee, but even a cursory investigation would suggest that Rick was, in reality, a chief executive officer.

The federal probation officer tolerated Rick’s adjustment for the first half of his term on supervised release. He had kept current with his monthly reports, and no one could find fault with his financial statements. Rick managed his expenses to the penny, promptly making a $500 monthly restitution payment. When the probation officer asked Rick why he did not pursue a career opportunity more commensurate with his skills and earning capacity, Rick said that he did not want to accept such responsibilities until he had completed the terms of his supervised release.

Recognizing the irregularity, Rick’s probation officer ordered Rick to comply with tighter restrictions. His attempt to lead a nondescript life had failed. Rather than mailing in monthly reports, as Rick had done during the first 18 months of his supervised release, the probation officer made changes. With her suspicion aroused, she began requiring him to submit detailed reports that would account for his hourly whereabouts for the week ahead; Rick had to send that schedule by fax each Monday morning, and he was required to report in person to the probation officer regularly.

With Rick’s hourly schedule, the probation officer could observe Rick much more closely. The probation officer and a colleague would show up unannounced at the marketing company where Rick was supposedly earning $10 per hour. Rather than seeing a man who swept floors and made copies, the probation officers found Rick leading seminars, directing sales teams, coaching executives, and instructing his son how to increase revenues. Despite his charm and smooth preparation skills, Rick had lost all trust and credibility with the probation officer who was supervising his release.

The federal probation officers did not charge Rick with violating the conditions of his supervised release at once. Instead, they monitored him more closely. Thinking that he was in compliance with the technical conditions, Rick continued to submit his monthly reports, his weekly schedule, and he was careful to show deference and respect during his required visits to the probation office. Although he visited with his wife and younger son daily in their home, Rick returned to the low-budget apartment he maintained to sleep each night. He was committed to making it through the final months of his supervised release.

The probation office wasn’t having it. Rick had completed 34 of the 36 months he was required to serve on supervised release and he thought he was about to be discharged as a free citizen. Not so. Instead, the probation officer ordered Rick to come in for an unscheduled visit. The U.S. Marshals were waiting for him and took him into custody. The probation officer charged Rick with violating several conditions of his supervised release, including his filing of misleading reports, untruthful financial statements, and inappropriate business relationships.

As an offender on supervised release, Rick was not entitled to the higher standard of proof that applied to defendants in a criminal case. Instead of a unanimous verdict that would require jurors or a judge to find that Rick had violated the law beyond a reasonable doubt, the judge only had to conclude that a preponderance of the evidence suggested that Rick was in violation of his supervised release requirements.

While Rick believed he was advancing toward discharge and complete freedom, the probation officer was building a compelling case against him. The judge convicted Rick and sentenced him to serve a flat year in prison. Following his release from prison, Rick would begin a new two-year term of supervised release.

As a long-term prisoner I have had the questionable privilege of interviewing and writing about hundreds of federal prisoners. I have known many who left confinement to complete their terms on supervised release without disruption, and I have known many more who, sadly, because of their misguided efforts to hoodwink the probation office, returned to complete new terms of supervised release.

My experience convinces me that the best way to complete a term of supervised release successfully is to live with complete transparency. I am not a believer that probation officers have an inherent bias against offenders who transition from prison to successful careers. I am in contact with many people who concluded their prison terms and, upon release, launched ventures that brought them millions of dollars in earnings. Their strategy required absolute honesty, offering the probation officer complete access to all schedules and financial records without reservation or hesitation.

Succeeding on supervised release, I felt convinced, required the same five-point strategy that I have written about elsewhere. Those who know my work understand that I based that strategy on what I learned from Dr. Stephen Covey’s Seven Habits of Highly Successful People. Individuals had to lead proactive adjustments. They had to begin with the end in mind. They had to then put first things first. Those who succeeded upon release from prison, just as those who succeeded in any other life venture sought first to understand, and then to be understood. They always thought from a win-win perspective.

Recently I’ve become familiar with the work of Suzy Welch, who is married to Jack Welch, the famous former chairman of General Electric. She has spoken about a concept by which I have lived throughout my 22 years of imprisonment. Suzy Welch articulates the concept as ten-ten-ten thinking. When individuals think about how the decisions they make will influence their lives in 10 minutes, 10 months, and 10 years, they tend to make better decisions.

Rick was scheduled to serve several more months with me at Taft Camp and expected release in the fall of 2009. Upon his return home, he intended to adjust much more transparently, with full disclosure and completely open communications with his probation officer. He was 50-years-old and starting over, determined to extinguish his problems for good. I could see the anguish this second separation from family caused. The sad truth, he knew, was that he should have finished with the criminal justice system long ago.

The post Violating Conditions of Supervised Release appeared first on Prison News Blog.

 Ever since prison gates first locked behind me, I’ve thought more about what kind of life I would lead once I finished serving my sentence than I thought about advancing my release date. I hope readers will share that strategy with their loved ones in prison. My position has always been that I could not do anything to change the bad decisions I had made that brought me to prison, though I could do plenty to ensure that I would feel prepared to live a successful life upon release.

 To succeed upon release, I feel strongly that prisoners must choose a deliberate adjustment plan. This means not allowing environment or circumstances to dictate how prison time is served. A deliberate adjustment plan requires a clear vision and contemplation about emerging from prison in a way that ensures every decision the individual makes is advancing him toward that goal.

 The prisoner with a deliberate adjustment plan does not wait for prison administrators to offer programs that will help him develop skills. Resistance and discouragement from the prison machine are expected, and by accepting those obstacles he can condition himself to triumph over the “you’ve-got-nothin’-comin’” attitude.

 Similarly, the prisoner with a deliberate adjustment plan avoids the wicked influences of the prison. He creates opportunities to avoid interactions that can interfere with his progress rather than succumbing to those negative influences. He understands that decisions he makes today will influence the man he becomes tomorrow.

 If two out of every three prisoners fail upon release, then I think the one prisoner out of three who succeeds must make different decisions. Instead of allowing his environment to dictate his future, the prisoner who succeeds upon release is always thinking about what steps he can take to create more positive opportunities for growth.

 I have relied on this strategy for the entire 22 years of my imprisonment. It has made a huge difference in my life, and I really urge those in a prisoner’s family to encourage their incarcerated loved ones to think about steps they can take to empower themselves. If prisoners think about the challenges that await them upon release, finding the strength to discipline themselves in ways that will allow them to overcome those struggles comes easier.

 In my own adjustment, I came up with a three-part plan. The first component required that I educate myself from prison. The second component required that I create opportunities to contribute to the lives of others, both inside and beyond prison boundaries. The third component required that I build a strong network of support that would have a vested interest in helping me succeed upon my release.

 Every decision I have made throughout the decades I have served in prison has been in harmony with this three-part plan. I do not concern myself with prison certificates or acceptance from the prison machine. My duty and responsibility is to my family and to ensure that I have a fulfilling life when these gates open.

 I know that serving time can extinguish hope, not only for the prisoner but for the prisoner’s family as well. It is not easy to cope with all of the challenges. Restrictions on telephone access, visiting, and the overall negative atmosphere of imprisonment frequently lead to bitterness and anger. It is our responsibility, however, to transcend the prison experience. We must empower ourselves in order to ensure that when prison gates open, we stand ready to make up for the time we lost.

I feel a responsibility to share what I have learned.

The post Deliberate Adjustment Plans appeared first on Prison News Blog.

Many people speculate that legislators will return parole to the federal prison system. National interest in prison reform has reached a higher level than at any time during the 22 years I have served. And parole makes good sense. It motivates prisoners to work toward positive adjustment patterns that will help them emerge as law-abiding citizens. Without parole eligibility, many prisoners serve time without hope. That extinction of hope leads to high recidivism rates and higher costs for taxpayers.

Under the parole system, prisoners become eligible to see a panel of parole officers after they have served a portion of their sentences. For most offenders, it required that they serve one-third of their time in prison before they could apply for parole consideration by the parole board. The members on the panel would evaluate the prisoner’s record and determine whether the prisoner stood a good chance of living as a law-abiding citizen. If they looked upon the candidate for parole favorably, the parole board members could release the prisoner in accordance with conditions. Those conditions may include employment, abstinence from drugs or alcohol, permanent residence, and regular monitoring.

Upon accepting the conditions of release, the prisoner becomes a parolee. That means he returns to society to begin abiding by the conditions of his release. An assigned parole officer will monitor his compliance with the conditions of release. If the parolee violates the conditions of release, the parole officer may recommend his return to prison and either a judge or parole board will make a decision.

The system of supervised release which exists today exposes people who complete their terms in confinement to conditions similar to the parolee. The only difference is that a parole board does not have the discretion to order conditional release for those convicted of crimes past 1 November 1987.

As an old-law prisoner, I am eligible for a small amount of parole. Currently, the BOP calculates that I become eligible for release on parole in April of 2013. I dispute the BOP calculation, as I believe my eligibility begins about one year sooner, in mid 2012. I expect to resolve this issue in 2010.

Like other prisoners, I am hopeful that prison reform will return parole to the federal system. By 2011, I would expect to see an active federal parole board. We’ll see.

The post What About Parole? appeared first on Prison News Blog.

Effective prison reforms would offer incentives that motivate prisoners to become students and teachers.

In today’s federal prison system, administrators compel those who lack a high school education to participate in classes or study programs designed to bring each prisoner up to a high school equivalency level. Those prisoners who refuse to participate in the mandatory education program suffer penalties. They lose access to potential good-time credits, and they earn lower nominal wages from prison jobs. Yet high recidivism rates strongly suggest that high-pressure tactics like compulsory education programs fail to prepare prisoners for successful re-entry into society.

Through my work in writing about prisons, the people they hold, and strategies for growing through confinement, I’ve spoken with hundreds of prisoners. Many of those men serve lengthy sentences after continued failures following previous releases from prison. Despite citing struggles in finding adequate employment as the underlying reason for their repeated returns to prison, few make the full commitment necessary to educate themselves in meaningful ways. They suffer from an apathy that only gradual incentives can cure.

Tom provides an example of an attitude that I find typical of the prisoners I’ve interviewed. Tom served nine years in a California prison and was released in 2002. He said that upon his release, he could not find sustainable employment. The wages Tom earned while working at a car wash were insufficient for him to save the funds necessary to rent his own apartment. He said that after a full week’s work, he paid his expenses and was left with $3 in disposable income.

“If I bought an order of fries with my cheeseburger I would be over budget.”

While still in the halfway house, Tom engaged in criminal activity that resulted in his receiving a new prison term of ten years. I met him a few months after he arrived at the prison where I was held. Tom told me that he had no choice but to commit another crime, as he wasn’t making it in society as a working man.

Despite the new term, Tom served his time in ways that were unlikely to prepare him for sufficient employment upon his next release. He played cards. He participated in classes like leather shop, beading, and crocheting. Since Tom had earned his GED during his previous term, Tom felt certain that he had all the formal education he needed.

“More school ain’t gonna help me none,” Tom rejected my suggestion that he participate in a program that could lead to his earning an associate’s degree from Taft Community College. “No one out there’s gonna hire no felon. And these people here don’t care nothin’ about me going to school. All they want is that I earn me some certificates and that’s what I’m doing. I got ten years to serve. That’s all that matters. I’ll worry about what I’m gonna do when I get out of here.”

Prison reforms ought to change such attitudes, and my experience has convinced me that meaningful incentives would help. Prisoners like Tom fill our nation’s prison system. They lack an appreciation for the importance of education, and release dates that hover years or decades away lulls prisoners into a dangerous complacency. Too many prisoners become comfortably numb to their surroundings. All of society has an interest in motivating people in prison to work toward earning freedom, which is one reason that we need prison reforms now.

Legislators and administrators ought to introduce incentives that will motivate prisoners to both learn and teach. Those who educate themselves will have deeper skill sets from which they can draw when striving to create places for themselves in society upon release. If prison reforms were introduced that offered prisoners opportunities to work toward improving their quality of life while they served their sentences, and perhaps advance their release dates through a series of sustained accomplishments, legislators and administrators would simultaneously lower recidivism rates. Such prison reforms would make society safer and lower the costs of operating our $60 billion prison system.

The post Top Ten Prison Reform Goals, Article 2: Prison Reforms Ought to Offer Incentives to Transform Prisoners into Students and Teachers appeared first on Prison News Blog.

His release date approaches, yet he has no idea what kind of life he will lead. As we were watching the news this morning, we saw that a government agency had reported that more than 10 million Americans were unemployed. Dan is returning to Arizona, a state that has suffered one of the highest foreclosure rates in the nation. If national unemployment rates exceed 6 percent on average, Dan knows that unemployment may be worse in the Phoenix area. For a 40-year-old man without a job history, with a substandard education level, and with a lengthy prison record, the unemployment rate might approach 100 percent. The prospects for Dan’s future do not look bright.

Dan lacks both financial and human resources. Administrators from the Taft federal prison camp are releasing Dan to a halfway house six months prior to the expiration of his sentence. While in the halfway house, administrators will expect Dan to stabilize himself. They will allow him out of the house each day to find a job. Once he finds a job, Dan will have to forfeit 25 percent of his gross pay to the administrators of the halfway house. Those funds will cover the costs of Dan’s room and board. Administrators will allow Dan to keep the remainder of his earnings to prepare for his life.

During the time that Dan has served in prison, he has lost everything. He does not own any clothes outside of the ragged sweats he has accumulated from other prisoners. He does not own a vehicle and he has no idea of the cost of living. Without a work history, Dan does not expect to find a job that will pay more than $400 per week. Yet Dan will lose $100 of that money for halfway house expenses. He anticipates that after taxes, he may be left with $250 in take- home pay for a full week’s work.

Dan hopes to find a job during his first month at the halfway house. If he can reach that goal, he will have an opportunity to work for five months before his term will expire. When Dan’s time in the halfway house concludes, he will have to pay the full cost of his housing and food expenses, and he expects those costs to run him far more than $100 per week.

Yet during those six months that Dan serves in the halfway house, he knows that he will have personal expenditures. He will have to purchase clothing, as he does not own anything. He will have to pay for toiletries, transportation expenses, and any food that he eats away from the halfway house. Tough times await him.

Dan has heard that he will need to save sufficient funds to meet the expenses of renting an apartment. With move-in costs including a prepaid first-month rent, last-month rent, and a security deposit equal to one-month rent, Dan anticipates that even an efficiency apartment will require $1,200 in savings. With expected take-home pay of $250 per week, Dan has no idea how he will manage to save enough money to live independently.

In the early spring of 2008, President Bush signed a law known as The Second Chance Act. That law made it possible for administrators to release offenders to a halfway house up to one year prior to the expiration of their terms. That extra time in the halfway house was supposed to provide offenders with more opportunities to stabilize themselves upon release from prison. Dan requested halfway house placement at the earliest possible time so that he could find employment and work toward stability in accordance with Congress’s intention of The Second Chance Act. Yet the Warden at Taft Camp denied Dan’s request, assuring him that six months in the halfway house would be sufficient for him to find a job and save enough funds to begin his life. When Dan appealed the warden’s decision to higher-level administrators, they too declined to grant Dan relief.

Recidivism rates in our country exceed 60 percent. More than six in every ten offenders who walk out of prison engage in some type of activity that returns them to confinement within three years. For some, it appears that the complications awaiting their release dwarf the harshness of living in prison.

Prisons don’t have to churn out so much failure. Rather than warehousing prisoners like Dan for 14 years, administrators could have designed meaningful incentive programs that would have encouraged Dan to develop skills and resources that would allow him to transition to society as contributing citizen. We need prison reforms that will reverse the troubling trends of high recidivism rates. The entire mindset of these institutions need to change, and that change should begin by replacing the Director of the Bureau of Prisons with a new leader who shares the promising vision of President-elect Barack Obama.

For prisoners like Dan, any change will come too late. He will be home for Christmas of 2008, yet I have a suspicion that he may miss the steady routine of the human warehouse to which he has grown accustomed. Dan is not ready for the challenges of society. With more than 600,000 people returning to society from prison each year, Dan is but one of many examples that we need prison reform now.

In my article entitled Strategy for Successful Prison Adjustment, I offer guidance other prisoners may follow to ensure they don’t walk out like Dan.

The post Dan is Getting Out of Prison appeared first on Prison News Blog.

I do not think staff members as individuals relate to prisoners with a common humanity. Staff policies discourage them from interacting with prisoners on a personal level. The reason for this separation is that close interactions between inmates and staff can threaten the security of a prison environment. Security and preservation of the institution trumps the system’s concern for the inmate’s development. If the system had concerns about preparing inmates for law-abiding, contributory lives upon release, they would offer opportunities for inmates to earn freedom through merit. Instead, all that matters is the turning of calendar pages. The infrastructure inside generates a lot of friction and callousness and cynicism. I would not go so far as to write that staff members want to see inmate failure, though the policies of the system seem to discourage staff members from focusing on anything that would have to do with correcting behavior.

My term in prison began in 1987. I began serving my sentence inside the walls of a high-security penitentiary. After several years, I transferred to a medium-security prison. Then administrators transferred me to a low-security prison, where I was held for eight years. In 2003, administrators transferred me to a minimum-security camp, and I expect to remain in camp until my release, in 2012. After having served more than 21 years in prisons of every security level, I would conclude that very little correcting goes on. Prisons are more like human warehouses. Changes may come, but for now there does not seem to be a lot that would suggest to me that the system particularly “cares” about inmates. The allegiance that administrators show is to society. Through their myopic view, they create infrastructures that alienate prisoners. They limit access to education; they disrupt family ties; they extinguish hope; they punish rather than incentivize. As a consequence of such un-American policies, prisons breed failure as high recidivism rates show.

That is my perspective as a long-term prisoner. Through my writing, I hope to help others understand more about America’s prison system and urge reform.

The post Does the Corrections System Care About Inmates? appeared first on Prison News Blog.

As a long-term prisoner, I have no doubts about the destructiveness of this system. Statistics show that seven of every ten people who serve time in prison fail upon release. They find themselves arrested again for either technical violations of the conditions of release, or they return to prison for new criminal conduct. The responsibility is mine, I have always known, to prepare for success.

Since I could not contemplate a quarter century in prison, I thought about the first ten years. I set some clearly defined goals of what I wanted to achieve during that first decade. I wanted to educate myself. I wanted to contribute to society. I wanted to build a network of support. As I worked toward those goals, I began to grow more comfortable with the reality I had created for myself with the bad decisions of my early 20s. Yet I also understood that one day I would return to society. If I did not make serious progress, I would leave confinement into a prison of poverty and hopelessness. After 26 years of confinement, I knew that I would be nearly 50. I would not have a home. I would not have any clothes. I would not own a vehicle. Within less than two decades, I would be eligible for social security, yet I questioned whether my lack of a work history would entitle me to benefits. What would I do? I understood that starting a career at 50 would not be easy, especially since I had not lived in society since 1987.

Changes were occurring in the world. I realized that the onus was on me to prepare myself in every way for the obstacles that would be a part of my future. I had to do more than earn university degrees. I truly had to educate myself by expanding my vocabulary and building my communication skills. Writing was one way, I felt, that I could connect with society and prepare for the challenges that would await my return to society. I also had to keep in tip-top physical shape, as I could not allow my health to deteriorate. I had to reach beyond these boundaries and connect with other citizens. Those efforts, I hoped, would prepare me. That adjustment pattern has guided me through the first 21-plus years of my imprisonment. I will continue to rely upon the strategy as I move through these final years of my term. I am totally committed to the goals that I set for myself.

The post Why I Set High Standards for Myself in Prison appeared first on Prison News Blog.

In April of 2008, President Bush signed the Second Chance Act of 2007. According to an overwhelming majority from both houses of Congress, the legislation had several purposes. Primarily, the law exists to break the cycle of recidivism. One of the changes Congress enacted was to extend possibilities for access to halfway house placement. Unfortunately, administrators in the institution where I’m being held have thus far refused to recommend inmates for maximum halfway house placement.

With the Second Chance Act, Congress stated that federal inmates were now eligible to serve the final 12 months of their sentences in a community corrections center. Inmates could serve up to the final six-months of that 12-month window on home confinement. By providing that opportunity for inmates to serve the final portion of their sentences in a community corrections center, Congress hoped to help offenders rebuild ties to the community. Such change would enhance their ability to transition from prison into law-abiding citizens.

Although I expect administrators will modify their rigid stance and implement the policies to fulfill the intentions of Congress by 2010, it may take litigation to push them along. As of this writing, administrators in this facility resist this need for change from the you’ve-got-nothing-coming mentality. Instead of providing inmates with a clear path to maximum halfway house placement, policies here are to award minimal halfway house placement. Clearly, those who preside over such policies ignore the struggles inmates will face upon release from confinement.

No inmate leaves prison with intentions of failing to make a successful transition. Yet as Congress pointed out through the historic Second Chance Act, nearly seven of every ten people who leave prison return to confinement. The flawed policies of the past are at least partly to blame. With time restrictions on access to visiting and telephone, inmates lose their support systems as they spend time inside federal prisons. Congress authorized the extended halfway house provisions as a good-faith effort to help inmates strengthen their community ties. Prison administrators, however, ignore or diminish this need. Despite specific language in the legislation citing that “families are an often underutilized resource in the reentry process,” administrators at this prison are using evidence of such support as a reason to prolong an inmate’s stay in prison and minimize his access to halfway house placement.

Danny’s case presents a twisted example. He has been incarcerated for longer than 11 years. Despite repeated requests for transfer to a prison closer to home, for the past four years administrators have kept Danny out of state. He has not had a single visit in longer than five years. He is 38-years-old now and within one year of his scheduled release date. During Danny’s imprisonment, he has maintained a record that is free of any disciplinary conduct; he has earned two college degrees; he has participated in volunteer community projects that allow him to travel into society without escort or restraints. Clearly, Danny does not represent a threat.

Danny requested 12-months of halfway house placement. To bolster his argument for consideration, he explained to his case manager that he had never held a job in his life, yet he wanted desperately to succeed upon release. While living in the halfway house, Danny pointed out that he would have to

1. secure employment
2. save money necessary to rent an apartment, including a deposit, first, and last month payment
3. save money to purchase transportation
4. save money to purchase clothing
5. pay for his living expenses while he served time in the halfway house
6. re-acclimate himself to society after longer than a decade in prison.

He must also agree to forfeit 25 percent of his gross pay as a condition of living in the halfway house. Danny seemed a perfect candidate for the full 12-months of halfway house placement that Congress authorized with the Second Chance Act.

Danny’s case manager, however, told him that she would submit him for only between five and six months of halfway house placement.

“Five or six months,” Danny protested, “that won’t be enough time. I’m a felon without any work history. I expect to struggle in finding employment and may not earn more than $10 per hour. To fund my transition into society I’ll need to save a minimum of $4,000. How can you expect me to do that in only five to six months?”

“Records show that your family has been sending you an average of $100 per month,” his case manager responded. “They should help you.”

“They’ve been sending me that money to pay for my phone calls because I’ve been locked up out of state. That’s the only way we’ve been able to stay connected, but my mother lives in a trailer and she’s in her 60s. She can’t afford to help me. I’m 38 and need to take care of myself. Are you telling me that the responsible approach for me to take upon release is to leech off my family?”

“Our policy says you’re only entitled to between five and six months,” his case manager said. “That’s all I’m submitting you for. The rest is up to you.”

Danny’s prison record showed that he had acted responsibly, as was evidenced by his minimum-security rating. He was also realistic about the high hurdles that awaited him upon release. Congress was moving in the right direction to fight recidivism when it authorized administrators to provide inmates like Danny with up to 12 months of halfway house placement. Prison case managers at this institution, however, refused to budge. Rather than providing a path for Danny’s successful re-entry, they were setting Danny up for failure upon release. Ironically, the efforts he made to maintain family ties during his eleven years of confinement have disqualified him from maximum halfway house placement.

Inmates need time to make the transition from prison to society. Until administrators begin encouraging all inmates to earn maximum halfway house placement, however, they continue the status quo and facilitate the high recidivism rates Congress is trying to avoid.

The post What Second Chance? appeared first on Prison News Blog.