I would be interested to hear more of your thoughts Hush. TV is a given in keeping them occupied, so I don't have a problem with that. I do however feel there should be more thought that goes into programs dealing with personal healing, restitution for what they have done, and how to operate in society again once they are released. I am aware that you can in fact get a college degree whilst in prison, but how many of these people are actually hired in their degreed field? Don't most employers just toss those applicants in the trash once they see "Served time?"
If that's the case, what can we do to avoid that type of discrimination in the work force? Would it not be better to have them working and progressing in a field that makes them feel accomplished, rather than having them sit at home and live off the govt.? Idle hands you know.
Originally Posted by London Rayne
I'm running late at the moment and don't have time to fully draft a response. But rehabilitation takes money. And as this tread points out, folks are reluctant to spend money on prisons because 1) it's an easy issue for a demagogue to use to take pot shots at those spending the money; 2) the return on the investment comes years down the road and is very difficult to measure; and 3) while it is often successful in significant numbers of cases, you know going in that it is not going to work in the majority of cases -- these people are criminals for a reason.
So you combine those three factors, and you have seen a huge decline in the amount of attempted rehabilitation that goes on behind bars.
Then, from around somewhere between the mid 1960's and the mid 1980's, the U.S. attitude toward crime began to shift. The idea of allowing petty criminals to be placed on probation became unpopular. So we had huge increases in our incarceration rates (not just numbers of people behind bars, but the percentage of our population behind bars). This "get tough on crime" attitude had a number of bad consequences. Prisons cost more, so less money went to rehabilitation services. You had petty criminals locked up with hardened criminals. So when they were released, the previously petty criminals came out more often as not more attached to criminal attitudes and life-styles than when they went in. Finally, because it was unfashionable to be seen as "soft on crime," alternatives to incarceration were not explored.
In short, its a very complex problem, but at the root of it is the underlying attitudes of the public and the manner in which they are subject to manipulation by political advertising. That holds up prison reform more than any other single factor, in my judgment.