11-22-2014 Utah:
Utah’s Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ) is tackling some of our communities’ most difficult challenges. One of their key objectives is to "coordinate statewide efforts to reduce crime and victimization in Utah." For the past year, in partnership with the Pew Charitable Trust, CCJJ has been researching implementation of criminal justice best practices to manage Utah’s incarcerated individuals – and again manage those same individuals once they have served their time and are released back into our communities.
CCJJ recently announced 18 recommendations for "Justice Reinvestment," supported by data analysis from Pew. These recommendations, to be presented for legislators’ approval in 2015, would institute changes to help decrease our prison population (and future correctional spending) while posing little risk to public safety.
Great work, but there’s a glaring omission: solutions for dealing with Utah’s tsunami of incarcerated "sex offenders." Though Pew’s research revealed that nearly one third of Utah’s prison inmates are serving time for sex-related crimes, there is nothing among CCJJ’s recommendations that addresses this huge and growing population. This is a big missed opportunity.
Utah’s Department of Corrections reports that of 4,421 state inmates serving time for 1st or 2nd degree felony convictions, 1,992 are incarcerated for sex offenses. That’s a whopping 45 percent! Among all felony levels, 32 percent of inmates are in Utah’s prisons for sex offenses. Comparatively, the national figure is 6.2 percent. Idaho’s at 19 percent, Arizona’s at around 11 percent, and Nevada just over 12 percent. In 2014, there were more sex offenders behind bars in Utah than any other major category of offender.
CCJJ’s report does not reflect much curiosity about these shocking figures. The report avoids this serious question: Why are Utah prison cells packed with people convicted of sex crimes?
Penalties for sex crimes in Utah have been getting harsher and harsher. We’re keeping the people we put in prison for these crimes, longer and longer.
Our state also has been enthusiastically expanding the range of crimes for which people are required to register as a sex offender. Offenses range from child rape (clearly the most serious) to public urination (more silly than serious), but because our criminal justice system has a conviction- rather than risk-based orientation, all these people fall under the same umbrella and are thus treated the same. This approach floods the system with more offenders of an increasingly broad spectrum of offenses, some of which are decidedly non-violent and for which there is little risk of re-offense, especially with adequate treatment.
Contrary to popular belief, research shows that repeat offenses are less common among people convicted of sex offenses than for those convicted of other crimes. However, we still treat all types of sex offenders as if they will re-offend as soon as they can, regardless of intervention. Operating the system this way results in low-risk offenders consuming limited correction resources, while dangerous offenders get far less correctional attention than we would be wise to provide. It doesn’t help that the State Legislature has not increased funding for prison and community-based treatment for this population since 1996.
There are many ideas for correcting this misallocation of resources in our system, but Utah seems more interested in cracking down on any offense with the word "sex" attached to it. CCJJ hasn’t done the state any favors by letting us avoid the reality of this issue. Too bad. We’re missing a big opportunity to address a very unique Utah problem – which is likely to become only more pronounced over time. ..Source.. by Kendall Robins
Showing posts with label Prisons. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Prisons. Show all posts
November 22, 2014
Op-ed: Utah justice reformers ignore huge factor: sex offenders
April 27, 2014
Sex Offender Treatment: Federal Bureau of Prisons
The Federal Bureau of Prisons has a total inmate population of 215,383; at present, 11,699 are incarcerated for federal sex offenses (most often possession, receipt, or production of child pornography). This amounts to 6.1 percent of the Federal Bureau of Prisons entire inmate population.
There are 162 federal institutions (62 of which are true stand-alone prisons). For the vast majority, these are general character prisons, tasked with housing a broad swath of inmates convicted of any number of federal crimes. While these prisons are of many different security levels, they are regular prisons, housing all variety of offenders (including federal sex offenders).
Sex Offender Management Program (SOMP) Prisons
Due to the special needs of incarcerated sex offenders (e.g., enhanced monitoring for offending behaviors, protection from other inmates, the sometimes more sophisticated criminality of this population, etc.), the Federal Bureau of Prisons has 10 prisons which specifically house sex offenders. These are called Sex Offender Management Program (SOMP) institutions, which house inmates with a variety of instant offenses, but also a stronger psychology department, which takes a more active role in the monitoring of sex offender populations for deviant or "risk relevant" behaviors.
According to the BOP, "This higher concentration of sex offenders within a [SOMP] institution helps offenders feel more comfortable acknowledging their concerns and seeking treatment." While this could be the case for some, it is more likely that incarcerated sex offenders are happy to merely be at a prison where they aren't going to be assaulted, and, possibly killed for the nature of their instant offense, or for a prior conviction of similar character.
The sad fact is that the stories are true. Incarcerated sex offenders have a rough time in prison. At the higher security levels (e.g., high and medium security federal prisons), they tend to be harassed, attacked, and brutalized. This is part of an institutional culture if not supported by the prison administration, then accepted by it as inevitable. This creates real problems for incarcerated sex offenders, who often must "check in" to the Special Housing Unit (i.e., solitary confinement) for their own protection. If not, they are known to be "beat off" a yard, where a group of fellow prisoners knock the sex offender to the ground (often in the chow hall or in front of the lieutenant's office), and stomp them in sight of the prison guards. In this manner, the guards know that it is time for the sex offender to be placed in the hole for their own protection (called "protective custody") and possibly transferred elsewhere.
In an effort to protect inmate sex offender populations, the Federal Bureau of Prisons has tasked a total of 10 prisons to specifically house sex offenders (either those who are in prison for a sexual offense or those who have one in their criminal history). These are the SOMP prisons. Due to the higher percentage of sex offenders at these prison -- some suggest upwards of 40 to 60 percent of the inmate population at these prisons -- they tend to be much easier prisons, where inmates incarcerated of less savory crimes can survive.
What follows is a list of all 10 Sex Offender Management Program (SOMP) prisons in the Federal Bureau of Prisons:
Administrative Security Sex Offender Prisons
1. FMC Carswell (Fort Worth, TX)
2. FMC Devens (Ayers, MA)
Low Security Sex Offender Prisons
3. FCI Elkton (Elkton, OH)
4. FCI Englewood (Littleton, CO)
5. FCI Seagoville (Seagoville, TX)
Medium Security Sex Offender Prisons
6. FCI Marianna (Marianna, FL)
7. USP Marion (Marion, IL)
8. FCI Petersburg Medium (Petersburg, VA)
9. FCI Tucson (Tucson, AZ)
High Security Sex Offender Prisons
10. USP Tucson (Tucson, AZ)
Sex Offender Treatment Programs in Federal Prisons
At these institutions, the Federal Bureau of Prisons also offers their Sex Offender Treatment Programs (SOTP). The BOP offers both residential (SOTP-R) and non-residential sex offender (SOTP-NR) treatment programs. The difference is in the intensity of the programs, residential or non-residential treatment modality, and which inmates can enroll in this voluntary treatment. Federal prisoners can learn more about these treatment programs, and can enroll in them, by speaking with a member of their prison's Psychology Department or by reading our blog post on the Federal Bureau of Prisons' recently promulgated sex offender management program statement.
Non-Residential Sex Offender Treatment Program (SOTP-NR)
The Federal Bureau of Prisons' Non-Residential Sex Offender Treatment Program is offered at all of the above mentioned federal prisons, with the exception of FMC Devens and USP Marion. This program is restricted to "offenders evaluated to have low to moderate risk of reoffending." The program lasts 9 to 12 months and participants meet 2 to 3 times each week in their prison's Psychology Department for the treatment sessions. According to the BOP, program participants "learn basic skills and concepts to help them understand their past offenses and to reduce the risk of future offending," through various levels of treatment.
Residential Sex Offender Treatment Program (SOTP-R)
The Federal Bureau of Prisons' Residential Sex Offender Treatment Program is, at present, offered only at USP Marion and FMC Devens. Program participation is restricted to "offenders with an elevated risk of reoffending." This program is 12 to 18 months in duration and participants engage in treatment 5 days each week. Due to the residential treatment modality, monitoring, supervision, and treatment is intensive. According to the BOP, "Participants benefit from a therapeutic community on a residential housing unit where they work to reduce their risk of future offending." The residential housing units also have increased conduct regulations, i.e., restrictions on certain media and recreational activities, such as role playing games.
Where to Go For More Information
The topic of sex offenders in the Federal Bureau of Prisons is very taboo. As such, not many news outlets, prison consultants, or attorneys like to publicly touch upon it. We at the Prison Law Blog are not like these entities. When we see a need, we strive to fulfill it. With this being said, in the coming months, we will be publishing several more pages concerning sex offenders in the Federal Bureau of Prisons, how criminal defendants can seek a judicial recommendation for designation to a SOMP facility, and what incarcerated sexual offenders should do to protect themselves in prison. ..Source.. by Christopher Zoukis, Prison Law Blog
April 16, 2012
Prison rehab program axed due to budget cuts
4-16-2012 Canada:
An award-winning program that helps rehabilitate prisoners and protect the public by keeping them from re-offending is falling victim to budget cuts.
The Lifeline program, which provides support for those serving life sentences and helps re-integrate those who are released on parole, has been operating in Canadian prisons for more than 20 years.
Rick Sauve, who spent 17 years behind bars and has been out for almost two decades, says he survived thanks to the program he now works for.
"When you get a life sentence, you think your whole world is over," Sauve told CBC News. "There’s not a lot of help in there. You’re kind of just left to flounder."
Skip Graham, who works with the St. Leonard’s Society, which oversees Lifeline, believes the decision to cut the program flies in the face of good corrections policy and has nothing to do with saving money.
"It’s the most practical, humane program that has proven itself, and it’s the one they’ve decided to eliminate, so it’s just politics," he said.
"The lifeline program is really the [Correctional Service Canada's] only strategy in addressing the long-term offender, which makes up about 20 per cent of the population," Graham added.
No 'significant results' achieved
Officials with CSC declined to be interviewed, but in a statement they said the program was not proven to be cost-effective.
Julie Carmichael, a spokesperson for Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, told CBC News in an email Monday that evaluation and research findings did not reveal significant results were being achieved by the program.
"It wasn’t producing any results that improved public safety. We will not spend a dollar on corrections that is not necessary to keep Canadians safe," Carmichael wrote.
The CSC's annual budget is $3 billion, and of that roughly two per cent is spent on programming for inmates. The estimated cost of the Lifeline program is $2 million per year
However, research by CSC staff reports that inmates involved in Lifeline were less likely to get into problems while in prison or end up in segregation. Additionally, figures show lifers released on parole are among the least likely to re-offend.
While Ottawa is giving up on the program, other jurisdictions aren’t. Officials from Colorado are so impressed with Lifeline, that they’re setting up a similar program based on the model here. ..Source.. by CBCNews Canada
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
