Why is Indiana spending all this money on prisons? See Indiana DOC shifts course, plans to keep Michigan City prison open beyond 2027. Although this sounds like good ideas:
According to the architecture firm, administrative spaces at the new prison site will be enhanced to provide amenities for staff “that they have not been afforded in the existing facilities.”
A medical area and dedicated mental health building for inmates are under construction, too. Recreational spaces, vocational programs and industrial manufacturing are also included in the campus design.
The maximum-security facility will have 4,200 beds, making it one of the largest in the state.
When the project was announced in 2023, DOC leaders emphasized cost savings as the driving motivation.
Not so good is this:
The public defender council said the delayed closing decision underscores state expectations that the prison population will continue to rise.
“[I]t is no secret that DOC is preparing for a larger prison population, with projections indicating the count could exceed 28,000 by 2028,” the group continued. “While many factors play a role, a central driver is the reduction in credit time enacted in the 2014 criminal justice reforms, compounded by new crimes and sentence enhancements. In other words, policy choices, not crime rates, are fueling this growth.”
For over a decade, Norwegian prisons have been paraded as an example for American prison reform. Google brings up no signs that Indiana has paid any attention. It is still band up enough people in prison to make the Republicans look tough on crime. Ah, our American preoccupation with measuring the length of our privates as public policy!
Some background on Norwegian prisons follows, and then why rehabilitation should be the foremost objective for Indiana prisons:
Can US prisons take a page from Norway? Five questions.
Making a prison environment more humane will translate to a more efficient prison system overall, experts say. And the Norwegian model prioritizes rehabilitation and reintegration over punishment. Safety, transparency, and innovation are considered fundamental to its approach. Core practices aim to create a feeling that life as part of a community continues even behind walls and bars, says Synøve Andersen, postdoctoral research criminologist at the University of Oslo.
In some Norwegian prisons, incarcerated people wear their own clothes, cook their own meals, and work in jobs that prepare them for employment, says Dr. Andersen. They have their own space, too, since single-unit cells are the norm. “There is a goal to provide people living in a unit together with a shared common space with a kitchen, washer and dryer, and lounging space,” she says.
***
The Prisoner as One of Us: Norwegian Wisdom for American Penal Practice: PDF of Emory Law journal article.Norway receives much attention for its low rate of recidivism, but some experts disagree on the measure as a rate of success. “[Recidivism] is not just a product of the correctional system. It has everything to do with your social safety net, your network, your support structure, and your job opportunities,” said Dr. Andersen.
Also, the physical dimensions and layouts of prisons differ drastically between the U.S. and Norway. Instead of large, centralized prisons in the U.S., Norway utilizes a system of small, community-based correctional facilities that focus on rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
While 8% of prisons in the U.S. are private prisons, according to the National Institute of Corrections, all Norwegian prisons fall under the public sector, and some collaborate with nongovernmental and volunteer organizations to provide services to people.
The changes being piloted in U.S. prisons “are not generally incremental,” says criminologist Dr. Hyatt. “They are holistic and they are pervasive.”
Oregon is one of a handful of states testing a Norwegian-inspired approach to prison reform that’s designed to bring greater humanity to corrections and improve conditions for staff as well as those who live behind walls. This includes reducing the use of solitary confinement. In the first evaluation of this method in a United States’ prison, the UCSF researchers found the Norwegian techniques dramatically increased the time people spent outside their cells and, in turn, reduced disciplinary actions and violence.
The reforms also increased engagement in social activities, particularly for those with serious mental health and behavioral problems, according to an analysis by the Amend team published in July in the online journal PLOS ONE.
From 2016 to 2021, the rate of assaults dropped almost 74% among residents who interacted with teams that had been trained in the techniques. And staff use-of-force incidents dropped nearly 86% in the Behavioral Health Unit, which houses individuals with mental health disorders who tend to have the most disruptive behaviors.
***
Advocates of the reforms say there’s nothing intrinsically Norwegian about the approach, and it can be adapted for the U.S. Before that can happen, however, correctional officers need to buy into the concept.
Toby Tooley was a captain at the Oregon State Penitentiary system in 2018 when he participated in an immersion program in Norway and brought the concepts home. He encountered some resistance from his fellow officers, but said they started to see the value both for the residents and for themselves. As incidents of violence began to drop, officers in the program saw their health and personal lives improve as their stress diminished.
What We Can Learn From Norway’s Prison System: Rehabilitation & Recidivism
Norway has 57 prisons with a total of 3,600 cells, 70% of which are high-security cells. The largest prison has 400 cells, while the smallest has only 15. The average Norwegian prison has 70 cells.
One of the biggest differences between the incarceration systems of Norway and the USA is that Norway does not have large, centralized jails. Instead, Norway utilizes a system of small, community-based correctional facilities that focus on rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
There’s a rehabilitative reason for having so many prisons in a relatively small country. The Norwegian government believes that incarcerated individuals should be geographically close to their homes, so they can maintain relationships with spouses, friends, and family.
Many Norwegian prisons allow prisoners to have visitors up to three times per week. They even allow conjugal visits with spouses. There is a strong emphasis placed on relationships so that incarcerated individuals have a strong support system after their release.
***
Low recidivism isn’t the only benefit. Norway’s rehabilitative approach also has a positive impact on the country’s economy. Fewer people in prison means more capable adults are available for employment. In fact, many prisoners leave prison with additional skills. The Norway prison system focuses not only on emotional and moral rehabilitation, but also on job skills. That’s one reason why prisoners who were unemployed before prison see a 40% increase in employment rates after prison.
***
However, it’s difficult to predict whether Norwegian-style prison policies could succeed in the United States or other western countries. One of the biggest factors that makes Norway’s prison system successful is that the approach has widespread support throughout the population. Norway’s citizens believe deeply that the goal of prison should be to help prisoners succeed after release, not to implement punishment that makes life more difficult.
Another factor is economics. Norway spends $93,000 each year for each prisoner in its system. It may be effective to focus on rehabilitation in prison, but it isn’t cheap. By contrast, the United States spends a third of that amount, $31,000. How would citizens in other western countries feel about a policy that increases spending 300% and improves living conditions for criminals? It would likely be a divisive proposal in the United States and many other countries.
Indiana’s Prison System: A Quick Overview
Indiana Department of Correction:
Faith & Character Based Initiatives, Vocational Education, Literacy Education, and other programs are here.
Recidivism Reports. These quotes are from the 2024 report (pay attention to its 3-year window):
The Indiana Department of Correction (IDOC) defines recidivism as a return to incarceration within threeyears of the offender’s date of release from a state correctional institution. A recent study by the IDOCcalculated the 2024 recidivism rate for offenders released from IDOC during calendar year 2021. This study found that:
• Of those offenders released in 2021, 36.52% were recommitted to the IDOC within three years of their release date, for either a new conviction or a violation of post-release supervision.
Of all offenders who recidivated, approximately 42% returned to IDOC for the commission of a newcrime, compared to approximately 40.9% for a technical rule violation of post-release supervision.16.8% of offenders returned for other reasons (e.g., returned escapee, pending parole board).
• Male offenders had a higher recidivism rate when compared to female offenders. Of male offenders released in 2020, 38.5% returned to the IDOC, versus 24.4% of female releases.
• The recidivism rates for offenders released in 2020 broken down by race are as follows:
– African American: 39.7%.
– Caucasian: 35.7%
– Hispanic: 32.5%.
• One of the highest risk groups of offenders are those with a mental health classification indicating substance use needs that cause functional impairment, who recidivated at a rate of 84.4% (of 96 released in 2021) compared to a rate of 36% for other mental health classifications.
Why is rehabilitation supposed to be the foremost objection of Indiana's penal system? Because Indiana's Bill of Rights says it is:
Section 18. The penal code shall be founded on the principles of reformation, and not of vindictive justice.
You decide if Indiana's prison system meets its constitutional mandate. You decide if the Norwegian style of prison does not better match this constitutional right at lower cost.
My answers are: it doesn't match; and thinking along the Norwegian lines does, and at lower cost (remember the cost of police and courts in dealing with repeat performers). Is it a perfect solution? No, but perfection does not exist in this world
One last thing, think about this from IDOC's Educational services page:
On-going research has found that ex-Incarcerated Individuals who are employed post-release are less likely to recidivate. Increasing educational attainment while incarcerated holds the promise of increasing employment opportunities at sustainable wages and ending a repetitive cycle of involvement in the State’s criminal justice system. Indiana’s Correctional Education programs begin with a strong commitment of resources to basic reading, mathematics, and language arts.
That's the failure of our education system,
sch
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please feel free to comment