scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Book

When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoner Reentry

01 Jan 2003-
TL;DR: In this paper, a profile of returning prisoners is presented, along with a discussion of the changing nature of Parole Supervision and Services, and the role of the victim's role in prisoner reentry.
Abstract: Preface 1. Introduction and Overview 2. Who's Coming Home? A Profile of Returning Prisoners 3. The Origins and Evolution of Modern Parole 4. The Changing Nature of Parole Supervision and Services 5. How We Help: Preparing Inmates for Release 6. How We Hinder: Legal and Practical Barriers to Reintegration 7. Revolving Door Justice: Inmate Release and Recidivism 8. The Victim's Role in Prisoner Reentry 9. What to Do? Reforming Parole and Reentry Practices 10. Conclusions: When Punitive Policies Backfire Afterword
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The conceptual framework that emerged highlighted the significant impact of structural violence and traumatic disruptions to place and relationships, as well as an ongoing dialectical tension between considering passive participation in street life or choosing recovery.

12 citations


Cites background from "When Prisoners Come Home: Parole an..."

  • ...…prisoners face significant barriers to obtaining employment, housing, health care, and public benefits, compared to the general population, they are also more likely to be low-skilled, uneducated, and have physical and mental health problems (Hammett et al., 2001; Petersilia, 2003; Travis, 2005)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Mock PBMs may not be adequate proxies for studying PBM decision-making and when adopting parole guidelines, correction authorities should also take into account factors mock PBMs considered important.
Abstract: Parole board members (PBMs) decide whether or not to release prisoners on parole. Parole release decisions can have a significant impact on the public so community sentiment is important. This research investigates whether actual PBMs make different release decisions than mock PBMs (college students). Participants decided whether to grant parole to a mock prisoner. Participants listed the factors that influenced their decision and their perceptions of the offender. As compared to mock PBMs, actual PBMs were more likely to deny parole, especially when perceptions of the inmate were controlled. Even so, actual PBMs perceived the prisoner as more likable and credible than mock PBMs. Findings may result from the different experiences, knowledge, and attributions that actual and mock PBMs make. Findings suggest mock PBMs may not be adequate proxies for studying PBM decision-making. When adopting parole guidelines, correction authorities should also take into account factors mock PBMs considered important.

12 citations


Cites background from "When Prisoners Come Home: Parole an..."

  • ...In contrast, discretionary release procedures (also known as indeterminate sentencing) occur when states permit PBMs to use discretion when deciding whether to grant parole (Petersilia, 2003)....

    [...]

  • ...Researchers have examined the decisionmaking of PBMs to understand factors that influence their decisions (Petersilia, 2003)....

    [...]

  • ...The discretionary powers granted to PBMs range from permitting PBMs full release powers to limited release powers (e.g., New York does not give PBMs discretion in releasing violent felons) (Petersilia, 2003)....

    [...]

  • ...As of 2002, rather than having a parole hearing, three out of every four prisoners were released automatically after completing the mandatory time (Petersilia, 2003)....

    [...]

  • ...Early release was originally designed as a procedure to respond to prison overcrowding and as an incentive to encourage pro-social behavior among prisoners (Petersilia, 2003)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Parole rejection/approval of inmates is subject to the decision-making of the parole board members of each prison as discussed by the authors, and previous studies have found that many factors influence the decision of the Parole Board.
Abstract: Parole rejection/approval of inmates is subject to the decision-making of the parole board members of each prison. Previous studies have found that many factors influence the decision of the parole...

12 citations


Cites background from "When Prisoners Come Home: Parole an..."

  • ...Supervision during parole encourages parolees to behave appropriately after release and helps them re-enter the community successfully (Chang, 2007; Chen, Lin, & Su, 2007; Hsu, 2005; Petersilia, 2003; Su, 2010)....

    [...]

01 Jan 2010
TL;DR: The International Council on Human Rights Policy (ICHRP) as discussed by the authors was established in 1998 to conduct applied research into current human rights issues, which is designed to be of practical relevance to policy-makers in international and regional organisations, in governments and intergovernmental agencies and in voluntary organisations of all kinds.
Abstract: This report looks into the human rights implications of contemporary patterns of social control: how policies construct and respond to people, behaviour or status defined as " undesirable " , " dangerous " , criminal or socially problematic. Drawing on research across five policy areas: infectious diseases, urban spaces and the poor, policing, migrants, and punishment and incarceration, as well as a case study of the Roma in Europe, the report is relevant to human rights advocates and professionals working in diverse policy areas. The report highlights the value of a social control perspective in engaging with social policy, especially the influence of political economy and notions of risk and danger. It points to human rights challenges and ways forward with respect to ideas of crime and criminality, penal sanctions, non-criminal sanctions and " soft " controls, segregation and exclusion, protection and victim rights, privatisation, surveillance, and policy transfer regimes. The International Council on Human Rights Policy (ICHRP) was established in Geneva in 1998 to conduct applied research into current human rights issues. Its research is designed to be of practical relevance to policy-makers in international and regional organisations, in governments and intergovernmental agencies and in voluntary organisations of all kinds. The ICHRP is independent, international in its membership and participatory in its approach. It is registered as a non-profit foundation under Swiss law. The International Council on Human Rights Policy was established in 1998 following an international consultation that started after the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna. It conducts practical research into problems and dilemmas that confront organisations working in the field of human rights. The ICHRP starts from the principle that successful policy approaches will accommodate the diversity of human experience. It cooperates with all that share its human rights objectives, including voluntary and private bodies, national governments and international agencies. The ICHRP research agenda is set by the Executive Board. Members of the International Council meet annually to advise on that agenda. Members help to make sure that the ICHRP programme reflects the diversity of disciplines, regional perspectives, country expertise and specialisations that are essential to maintain the quality of its research. To implement the programme, the Council employs a staffed Secretariat based in Geneva. Its task is to ensure that projects are well-designed and well-managed and that research findings are brought to the attention of relevant authorities and those who have a direct …

12 citations


Additional excerpts

  • ...Also, Petersilia (2003)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors investigated the effect of criminal records on job search strategies and found that former prisoners are less likely than non-offenders to find work during the search process because they use fewer search methods, and because they over-invest in ineffective methods while under-investing in more effective methods.
Abstract: To date, researchers have been very attentive to how the stigma of criminality informs employers’ hiring decisions, and, in the process, diminishes the employment opportunities afforded to jobseekers so stigmatized. Few researchers, however, have investigated the extent to which criminal records also shape jobseekers’ search strategies in ways that either attenuate or amplify the effects of their negative credentials. We fill this gap in the literature by investigating how arrest, conviction, and incarceration affect the scope of jobseekers’ search efforts as well as the specific methods they deploy. We then examine the extent to which gaps in job search success can be attributed to stigmatized jobseekers’ search strategies. Analysis of the NLSY97 reveals that arrestees and former prisoners (but not ex-convicts) are disadvantaged both by the scope of their search efforts and by the specific methods they use. Arrestees are less likely than non-offenders to find work during the search process because they use fewer search methods, and because they over-invest in ineffective methods while under-investing in more effective methods. Although former prisoners are also disadvantaged by over- and under-investing, we primarily attribute their lower odds of search success to the differential impacts of their search strategies. Even when the scope and nature of their searches mirror those of non-offenders, their searches are less likely to end successfully. By bringing “search” into debates on punishment and inequality, we provide a new and complementary way to understand how a criminal record negatively affects jobseekers’ chances of finding work.

12 citations