Coerced Treatment For Drug Addiction
by recoveryhelpdesk on May 1, 2011 ·
Will your son’s arrest ultimately turn out to be a good thing? Not likely.
I certainly understand how a mother could feel a sense of relief when her son is arrested. Even her son may feel a certain sense of relief.
Finally something might actually derail the runaway train. But what about the train wreck that follows?
For the last 10 years, I’ve run an incarceration-prevention program for people living with opiate dependence. Our goal is to help people find a path to recovery that does not pass through the jailhouse door.
Not only is it possible to find a path to recovery that does not pass through the jailhouse door, but passing through the jailhouse door reduces your chances of long term recovery success.
Sure, arrest and the threat of incarceration can result in a new focus on the need for change, and provide motivation for change. But this particular path to focus and motivation risks some devastating side effects.
There are other ways to elicit focus on the need for change and build motivation for change. Ways that are more effective over the long term and less harmful.
I fear that as a society we are too ready to use the cudgel of coerced treatment. We’ve talked ourselves into believing that incarceration is a therapeutic response to addiction. But the many-forked path through the criminal justice system often leads every which way but stable, long-term recovery.
I think we would be smart to be wary of a system of coerced treatment for addiction through the threat of incarceration –just as we would be wary of a system of coerced treatment for any other health issue with a behavioral component such as obesity, smoking, diabetes or heart disease.
I think we should recognize and be wary of the “enablers” of this system:
1. Desperate parents, families and communities;
2. Lazy and unskilled treatment providers who bottom feed on coerced treatment;
3. Politicians who get more political mileage out of putting money into the criminal justice system instead of the drug treatment system; and
4. Unjustified stigma against drug users that grants social permission to incarcerate rather than provide effective treatment.
I feel no sense of relief when a client is arrested. I recognize that the job of helping that person build a safe and sustainable recovery just got a lot harder.
“I’m never coming back here again.”
“I’m never going to use again.”
“Getting arrested saved my life, if I wasn’t here I’d be dead by now.”
I hear these statements often from clients I visit in jail. I recognize the sincerity behind the statements. After many years of experience, I also recognize that these kinds of sincere statements are often not only not actually accurate, but almost the opposite of the reality of the situation.
Once in jail, more likely to be back in jail again.
Once in jail, less likely to be able to achieve the conditions of stability necessary to achieve long term recovery.
Incarceration is more likely to put a life at risk. Getting effective treatment would have been more likely to save a life.
Getting sucked into the criminal justice system most often delays recovery, complicates recovery and destabilizes recovery. Most people don’t get treatment in jail, and don’t get linked to treatment after release from jail. Instead, statistics show that a large percentage of fatal overdoses happen right after release from incarceration.
There is a basic human impulse to try to make sense of bad experiences by finding the good that might give the experience a positive meaning. We do this with war, serious illness, and even the tragic death of a loved one. It’s a healthy coping mechanism.
It’s healthy to focus on the good. It’s healthy to take the bad things that happen to us and weave them into our personal narratives in way that gives them positive and hopeful meaning. But as a society, it’s more healthy to recognize that bad things are bad.
Incarceration as a solution to addiction is BAD.
Showing posts with label substance abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label substance abuse. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Saturday, April 9, 2011
The Root: We Can't Afford To Not Fix Justice System
Statistics released by the U.S. Bureau of Justice and analyzed by Ohio State law professor Michelle Alexander show that, as of 2008, more African American men are in jail today than were slaves in 1850.
Benjamin Todd Jealous is president and CEO of the NAACP.
Lateefah Simon is executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area.
Reforming the nation's criminal-justice system is one of the most urgent civil rights issues of our time. One shocking fact illustrates why: More African-American men are entangled in the criminal-justice system today than were enslaved in 1850.
How did we get here? The rise in America's penchant for punishment can be traced as far back as the 1964 presidential campaigns of Barry Goldwater and George Wallace, each of whom made law and order a defining plank of his platform.
President Richard Nixon continued the trend, framing Democrats as "soft on crime" and pushing for tough law-enforcement policies in opposition to President Johnson's credo of tackling crime through a "war on poverty." "Doubling the conviction rate in this country would do more to cure crime in America than quadrupling the funds for [Hubert] Humphrey's war on poverty," Nixon told voters.
more....http://www.npr.org/2011/04/07/135203031/the-root-we-cant-afford-to-not-fix-justice-system
..Benjamin Todd Jealous and Lateefah Simon, NPR
Benjamin Todd Jealous is president and CEO of the NAACP.
Lateefah Simon is executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area.
Reforming the nation's criminal-justice system is one of the most urgent civil rights issues of our time. One shocking fact illustrates why: More African-American men are entangled in the criminal-justice system today than were enslaved in 1850.
How did we get here? The rise in America's penchant for punishment can be traced as far back as the 1964 presidential campaigns of Barry Goldwater and George Wallace, each of whom made law and order a defining plank of his platform.
President Richard Nixon continued the trend, framing Democrats as "soft on crime" and pushing for tough law-enforcement policies in opposition to President Johnson's credo of tackling crime through a "war on poverty." "Doubling the conviction rate in this country would do more to cure crime in America than quadrupling the funds for [Hubert] Humphrey's war on poverty," Nixon told voters.
more....http://www.npr.org/2011/04/07/135203031/the-root-we-cant-afford-to-not-fix-justice-system
..Benjamin Todd Jealous and Lateefah Simon, NPR
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Of the 2.3 million inmates in the U.S., more than half have a history of substance abuse and addiction, says Newsweek. Not all those inmates are imprisoned on drug-related charges (although drug arrests have been rising steadily since the early 1990s; there were nearly 200,000 in 2007). Josiah Rich, a professor of medicine and community health at Brown University, is worried that, by refusing or neglecting to provide treatment to these addicts, many U.S. prisons are missing the best chance to cure them—and in the process to cut down on future crime.
Treatment can reduce recidivism rates from 50 percent to something more like 20 percent, yet it is not widely provided. “Our system has taken the highest-risk and most ill people and put them in a place where they have constitutionally mandated health care,“ Rich says. “What a great opportunity to make a difference. Are we just trying to punish people? Or are we trying to rehabilitate people? What do we want out of this?” The National Institute on Drug Abuse says that just one fifth of inmates get some form of treatment. That number may be lower in the near future: tight budgets are forcing many states to reduce or close existing treatment programs. Kansas and Pennsylvania have already done so; California and Texas may may follow suit.
Link: http://www.newsweek.com/2010/06/29/the-case-for-treating-drug-addicts-in-prison.html
Monday, May 17, 2010
Friday, May 14, 2010
Justice Advocates to Governor: Cut Waste, Not Effective Programs, from Bloated Corrections Budget
For Immediate Release: May 13, 2010
(http://tinyurl.com/29fc5ar)
SAN FRANCISCO—As spending on California’s massive prison system continues unabated, Governor Schwarzenegger’s office has declared that the revised budget to be released tomorrow will propose “absolutely terrible cuts.” The American Civil Liberties Union, Drug Policy Alliance and Ella Baker Center for Human Rights call on the Governor to choose three effective, budget-saving reforms over wasteful corrections spending.
Californians are already living with over-crowded classrooms, higher fees for college, bare bones health care, and fewer public services. Meanwhile, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) overspent its budget again – by nearly $500 million so far. In addition, a recent investigation by the Sacramento Bee brought to light disturbing allegations of abuse, racial bias and misconduct by prison guards, raising more questions about CDCR’s commitment to rehabilitation and stewardship of public funds.
So that public safety dollars are used wisely to protect California communities, we recommend the following common-sense, budget-saving reforms:
•Reserve prison for serious offenses: Two-thirds of California inmates are in prison for non-violent, property or drug offenses. Prison cells are expensive and should be reserved for people who commit serious crimes. Those convicted of petty drug and property crimes should be dealt with at the local level. Three changes can achieve this: (1) people found in possession of small amounts of drugs should not be sent to prison; (2) certain property crimes that can be charged as either a felony or misdemeanor should be treated as misdemeanors only; and (3) the dollar threshold defining when property theft is a felony should be adjusted based on inflation. These changes have been endorsed by the Governor, the CDCR and the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and would save $292 million annually.
•Ensure fair sentencing and rehabilitation for youth: Youth in California serve the longest average sentences in the nation. Currently, the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) has the ability to keep youth locked up longer by giving them "time adds" based on behavior. Time adds account for one third of all custody time in DJJ. Assembly Member Nancy Skinner's bill, AB 999, would eliminate time adds and establish an incentive program in which young people can earn credits for program participation. AB 999 would cut state costs by over $130 million and would lead to further facility closures by reducing the number of young people in state custody.
•Restore rehabilitation programs at the state and local level: Last year, the CDCR cut $260 million from rehabilitation and treatment programs in prison. This year, the Legislature has threatened to eliminate all funding for Prop 36 drug treatment programs. These cuts will only lead to more incarceration. Instead, the Legislature should invest $30 million in available federal Byrne Grants –funds available for drug treatment – into Prop 36 programs. Criminal justice experts have all agreed: real, effective rehabilitation for non-violent drug and property offenders reduces crime and ultimately reduces corrections spending. According to UCLA research, every dollar invested in Prop 36 cuts state costs by $2 to $4 – primarily in incarceration costs.
All Californians should demand a just budget: Sacramento must end the waste in corrections, ensure that public safety dollars are used effectively, and protect all Californian communities by preserving funding for education, rehabilitation, and core social services.
CONTACTS:
Natasha Minsker, ACLU of Northern California, 415-621-2493
Margaret Dooley-Sammuli, Drug Policy Alliance, 213-291-4190
Kris Lev-Twombly, Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, 510-428-3939
(http://tinyurl.com/29fc5ar)
SAN FRANCISCO—As spending on California’s massive prison system continues unabated, Governor Schwarzenegger’s office has declared that the revised budget to be released tomorrow will propose “absolutely terrible cuts.” The American Civil Liberties Union, Drug Policy Alliance and Ella Baker Center for Human Rights call on the Governor to choose three effective, budget-saving reforms over wasteful corrections spending.
Californians are already living with over-crowded classrooms, higher fees for college, bare bones health care, and fewer public services. Meanwhile, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) overspent its budget again – by nearly $500 million so far. In addition, a recent investigation by the Sacramento Bee brought to light disturbing allegations of abuse, racial bias and misconduct by prison guards, raising more questions about CDCR’s commitment to rehabilitation and stewardship of public funds.
So that public safety dollars are used wisely to protect California communities, we recommend the following common-sense, budget-saving reforms:
•Reserve prison for serious offenses: Two-thirds of California inmates are in prison for non-violent, property or drug offenses. Prison cells are expensive and should be reserved for people who commit serious crimes. Those convicted of petty drug and property crimes should be dealt with at the local level. Three changes can achieve this: (1) people found in possession of small amounts of drugs should not be sent to prison; (2) certain property crimes that can be charged as either a felony or misdemeanor should be treated as misdemeanors only; and (3) the dollar threshold defining when property theft is a felony should be adjusted based on inflation. These changes have been endorsed by the Governor, the CDCR and the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and would save $292 million annually.
•Ensure fair sentencing and rehabilitation for youth: Youth in California serve the longest average sentences in the nation. Currently, the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) has the ability to keep youth locked up longer by giving them "time adds" based on behavior. Time adds account for one third of all custody time in DJJ. Assembly Member Nancy Skinner's bill, AB 999, would eliminate time adds and establish an incentive program in which young people can earn credits for program participation. AB 999 would cut state costs by over $130 million and would lead to further facility closures by reducing the number of young people in state custody.
•Restore rehabilitation programs at the state and local level: Last year, the CDCR cut $260 million from rehabilitation and treatment programs in prison. This year, the Legislature has threatened to eliminate all funding for Prop 36 drug treatment programs. These cuts will only lead to more incarceration. Instead, the Legislature should invest $30 million in available federal Byrne Grants –funds available for drug treatment – into Prop 36 programs. Criminal justice experts have all agreed: real, effective rehabilitation for non-violent drug and property offenders reduces crime and ultimately reduces corrections spending. According to UCLA research, every dollar invested in Prop 36 cuts state costs by $2 to $4 – primarily in incarceration costs.
All Californians should demand a just budget: Sacramento must end the waste in corrections, ensure that public safety dollars are used effectively, and protect all Californian communities by preserving funding for education, rehabilitation, and core social services.
CONTACTS:
Natasha Minsker, ACLU of Northern California, 415-621-2493
Margaret Dooley-Sammuli, Drug Policy Alliance, 213-291-4190
Kris Lev-Twombly, Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, 510-428-3939
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
The Drug War: A War on Women and Their Families | | AlterNet
The Drug War: A War on Women and Their Families AlterNet
Since 1977, the rate of female imprisonment has increased by nearly 800% and is still rising -- much of it attributable to the war on drugs.
April 5, 2010
The newest victims of the war on drugs are women and if Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske was sincere when he said that the war on drugs is not a war on the people of this country then it is time to evaluate how our policies affect the women of this country. Since 1977, the rate of female imprisonment has increased by nearly 800% and is still rising.
Since 1977, the rate of female imprisonment has increased by nearly 800% and is still rising -- much of it attributable to the war on drugs.
April 5, 2010
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Prison report: The Early Release Scare
By Just A Guy
Editors note: Just A Guy was recently released after serving a sentence in a California state prison. He continues to comment on law-enforcement and public-safety issues.
Here we continue with the anti-release rhetoric, saying that all the people are “dangerous criminals” and the releases will cause a spike in crime.
Here’s Los Angeles Police Protection League President Paul M. Weber:
“We can expect crime to go up as a result of this massive release, considering California has the highest recidivism rate in the nation, with seven out of ten parolees reoffending then returning to the prison system.”
Of course you can expect an increase in crime -- most of the people sent to county jails and prisons (especially county jails) have been given absolutely no rehabilitative programs. What is the real reason that seven out of 10 parolees return to jail, though? Is it from new crimes or parole violations? Why does California have the highest recidivism rate?
Maybe it’s because, for a long time now, parolees have been violated and sent back to prison for “technical violations” like leaving the county without permission or having contact with their significant other when they weren’t supposed to.
While it is certainly each individual’s responsibility to abide by the rules of parole, some of the things that parolees get violated for the first time are overwhelmingly ridiculous. Personally, I believe that parole should be eradicated except for truly violent offenders; parole is really a joke anyway, and it has never stopped someone that has the intention of committing new crimes from doing so. You think some parolee is going tell his/her parole officer, “I am going to go use drugs today and burglarize someone.” And, do you think all the cops know every parolee on their beat now? Give me a break.
Let’s talk about parole anyway. What is it? Really, it’s just an extension of your sentence. If you are sentenced to 4 years in prison for possession of drugs (or anything else), it’s really a seven year sentence. You could do all four years, be released and still have three years of parole and if you get violated and sent back you can wind up doing, on the installment plan, 3 more years in prison/jail.
Now, I don’t see parole as particularly difficult (just annoying) if you are really trying to get your shit together, but most people that are released on parole get out with significantly less than they went in with -- i.e. no to live, no job, and a worse attitude. Then, they are released to 10% unemployment, have no real job training or life skills, have been tainted by the California Penal System and are ripe to come back. What difference does it make if they get out now or later? They’re all getting out eventually.
When are you Californians going to get tired of spending more on prisons than your kid’s higher education? But this is the progressive state that voted against gay marriage…
Finally, why don’t you seriously consider amending three strikes? There are people that were sentenced to 25 to life for possession of miniscule amounts of drugs and their previous offenses were many, years prior. Guys sentenced to life for stealing a pizza or a bike; that’s a reality.
And you want to reduce prison spending? Legalize drugs. Period.
By Tim Redmond: January 20, 2010 01:47 PM
Editors note: Just A Guy was recently released after serving a sentence in a California state prison. He continues to comment on law-enforcement and public-safety issues.
Here we continue with the anti-release rhetoric, saying that all the people are “dangerous criminals” and the releases will cause a spike in crime.
Here’s Los Angeles Police Protection League President Paul M. Weber:
“We can expect crime to go up as a result of this massive release, considering California has the highest recidivism rate in the nation, with seven out of ten parolees reoffending then returning to the prison system.”
Of course you can expect an increase in crime -- most of the people sent to county jails and prisons (especially county jails) have been given absolutely no rehabilitative programs. What is the real reason that seven out of 10 parolees return to jail, though? Is it from new crimes or parole violations? Why does California have the highest recidivism rate?
Maybe it’s because, for a long time now, parolees have been violated and sent back to prison for “technical violations” like leaving the county without permission or having contact with their significant other when they weren’t supposed to.
While it is certainly each individual’s responsibility to abide by the rules of parole, some of the things that parolees get violated for the first time are overwhelmingly ridiculous. Personally, I believe that parole should be eradicated except for truly violent offenders; parole is really a joke anyway, and it has never stopped someone that has the intention of committing new crimes from doing so. You think some parolee is going tell his/her parole officer, “I am going to go use drugs today and burglarize someone.” And, do you think all the cops know every parolee on their beat now? Give me a break.
Let’s talk about parole anyway. What is it? Really, it’s just an extension of your sentence. If you are sentenced to 4 years in prison for possession of drugs (or anything else), it’s really a seven year sentence. You could do all four years, be released and still have three years of parole and if you get violated and sent back you can wind up doing, on the installment plan, 3 more years in prison/jail.
Now, I don’t see parole as particularly difficult (just annoying) if you are really trying to get your shit together, but most people that are released on parole get out with significantly less than they went in with -- i.e. no to live, no job, and a worse attitude. Then, they are released to 10% unemployment, have no real job training or life skills, have been tainted by the California Penal System and are ripe to come back. What difference does it make if they get out now or later? They’re all getting out eventually.
When are you Californians going to get tired of spending more on prisons than your kid’s higher education? But this is the progressive state that voted against gay marriage…
Finally, why don’t you seriously consider amending three strikes? There are people that were sentenced to 25 to life for possession of miniscule amounts of drugs and their previous offenses were many, years prior. Guys sentenced to life for stealing a pizza or a bike; that’s a reality.
And you want to reduce prison spending? Legalize drugs. Period.
By Tim Redmond: January 20, 2010 01:47 PM
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Prison report (outside the walls): The parolee's dilemma
Editors note: Just A Guy has been writing from inside the California state prison system. He was released this week -- great news -- but the story is by no means over. Here's his latest; you can read his some of his previous posts here and here.
By Just A Guy
I’m sitting here about 24 hours after my release from California State Prison, Solano wondering what the hell I am going to do -- because I am staying in a hotel and unable to travel to my home.
Don’t get me wrong; I’m grateful to be out -- but beyond irritated at the measures The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has gone through to make it difficult for people to transition back into society. You see, I don’t live in this state, and though I started attempting to get my parole transferred out of state six months ago while in prison (as required) the request wasn’t done until two months ago, and Sacramento’s regional parole desk hasn’t even received it.
Now I’m hoping that I am given a travel pass to go out of state to see my little girls and be with my family for Thanksgiving, but that is, according to my P.O, a very tenuous proposition because his boss doesn’t like to give out travel passes…and since I just got out I’m not known…and it doesn’t seem to matter much that my house, my car, my business, and my entire support network are over a thousand miles away…you get the picture.
And I’m one of the lucky ones, because I have the resources to be able to live in a hotel for three months if necessary, to work from a hotel as well, to have a car delivered to me. WHAT ABOUT THOSE THAT DON’T HAVE THOSE RESOURCES?
(Not an hour after writing this I was fortunate enough to have my P.O call me and let me know that I have been approved to go to the state where my family resides as long as the supervising agent there is willing to accept me, which he is. I am grateful that my agent was able to go to bat for me and get this done, that I will be able to spend the holidays with my family, friends, and loved ones).
Again and again, the mediocrity of the R of CDCR stands to the fore -- yet the citizens are in denial as to what the real problem is. How can a system such as this possibly sustain rehabilitation? It’s truly unconscionable to proclaim that they are helping. What is also unconscionable is a lot of these P.O.’s really want to help people stay out of prison and protect society -- but their hands are being tied by tough-on-crime rhetoric and lack of funding.
Yeah, we committed the crimes, but the majority of these crimes were committed in the pursuit of drugs or alcohol or the rewards of selling the former. What good can possibly come of sending a person into society after many years with no substantive rehabilitative programs, and having him live in the bushes by the freeway, and not let him go home out of state because of CDCRs bureaucratic follies unrelated to the inmate’s attempts to get the paperwork done? Don’t you see how the system is set up for failure?
There are more than 600 more people in prison per 100,000 people in the USA vs. Netherlands (700 vs. 100) , but it’s the inmates that are the problem, right?
Yes, we (I) made some very poor choices, but I just did three years and two months for possession (a victimless crime). I was not allowed to go into the Substance Abuse Program because I had an out of state warrant for a marker I didn’t pay at a casino in Vegas (felony warrant), although I did pay it eventually. What about people who couldn’t pay? Do they need help any less? How does keeping someone from entering a drug abuse program because of old warrants help him prepare for a return to society? How does anything in this broken self-fulfilling prophecy of recidivism called CDCR help transition your soon-to-be neighbors back into the world?
Again, it’s our responsibility to find our own recovery, our own path to staying out of prison, but don’t believe for one minute that we are given the help many of us need, many of us hope for, and many of us never get…because though it is our responsibility many have never been responsible for anything at all, then they are asked to be, they try and find the brick wall that is CDC(R).
I really appreciate the support of my readers over the time I've been writing from inside, but my thoughts and observations on the prison system won't just end now that I've been released. I'll continue to write about the parole process as it develops and to comment on prison issues -- and you can look forward to a larger story on my experience in the near future.
By Just A Guy
I’m sitting here about 24 hours after my release from California State Prison, Solano wondering what the hell I am going to do -- because I am staying in a hotel and unable to travel to my home.
Don’t get me wrong; I’m grateful to be out -- but beyond irritated at the measures The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has gone through to make it difficult for people to transition back into society. You see, I don’t live in this state, and though I started attempting to get my parole transferred out of state six months ago while in prison (as required) the request wasn’t done until two months ago, and Sacramento’s regional parole desk hasn’t even received it.
Now I’m hoping that I am given a travel pass to go out of state to see my little girls and be with my family for Thanksgiving, but that is, according to my P.O, a very tenuous proposition because his boss doesn’t like to give out travel passes…and since I just got out I’m not known…and it doesn’t seem to matter much that my house, my car, my business, and my entire support network are over a thousand miles away…you get the picture.
And I’m one of the lucky ones, because I have the resources to be able to live in a hotel for three months if necessary, to work from a hotel as well, to have a car delivered to me. WHAT ABOUT THOSE THAT DON’T HAVE THOSE RESOURCES?
(Not an hour after writing this I was fortunate enough to have my P.O call me and let me know that I have been approved to go to the state where my family resides as long as the supervising agent there is willing to accept me, which he is. I am grateful that my agent was able to go to bat for me and get this done, that I will be able to spend the holidays with my family, friends, and loved ones).
Again and again, the mediocrity of the R of CDCR stands to the fore -- yet the citizens are in denial as to what the real problem is. How can a system such as this possibly sustain rehabilitation? It’s truly unconscionable to proclaim that they are helping. What is also unconscionable is a lot of these P.O.’s really want to help people stay out of prison and protect society -- but their hands are being tied by tough-on-crime rhetoric and lack of funding.
Yeah, we committed the crimes, but the majority of these crimes were committed in the pursuit of drugs or alcohol or the rewards of selling the former. What good can possibly come of sending a person into society after many years with no substantive rehabilitative programs, and having him live in the bushes by the freeway, and not let him go home out of state because of CDCRs bureaucratic follies unrelated to the inmate’s attempts to get the paperwork done? Don’t you see how the system is set up for failure?
There are more than 600 more people in prison per 100,000 people in the USA vs. Netherlands (700 vs. 100) , but it’s the inmates that are the problem, right?
Yes, we (I) made some very poor choices, but I just did three years and two months for possession (a victimless crime). I was not allowed to go into the Substance Abuse Program because I had an out of state warrant for a marker I didn’t pay at a casino in Vegas (felony warrant), although I did pay it eventually. What about people who couldn’t pay? Do they need help any less? How does keeping someone from entering a drug abuse program because of old warrants help him prepare for a return to society? How does anything in this broken self-fulfilling prophecy of recidivism called CDCR help transition your soon-to-be neighbors back into the world?
Again, it’s our responsibility to find our own recovery, our own path to staying out of prison, but don’t believe for one minute that we are given the help many of us need, many of us hope for, and many of us never get…because though it is our responsibility many have never been responsible for anything at all, then they are asked to be, they try and find the brick wall that is CDC(R).
I really appreciate the support of my readers over the time I've been writing from inside, but my thoughts and observations on the prison system won't just end now that I've been released. I'll continue to write about the parole process as it develops and to comment on prison issues -- and you can look forward to a larger story on my experience in the near future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)