Understanding the Problem



Recidivism or Reintegration: Which is the Problem?

 

1.      Recidivism is when a population recycles through the system for various reasons, often due to circumstances outside their own. Reintegration is when a portion of the imprisoned population attempt to reassimilate back into society to lead a fuller life. Tragically, recidivism occurs when anyone trying to reintegrate is rejected by society. This rejection takes many forms. It can come from hiring refusals, landlords unwilling to rent, and other social services that are either unavailable or denied due to technical reasons. “Recidivism refers to rearrest, reconviction, or reincarceration for a new crime or technical parole violation following a release from jail or prison, and recidivism measures usually include a specified time component (e.g., 1–9 years) following release” (Moore & Eikenberry, 2020, p. 345). When one includes mental illness and substance abuse into the question, the answer is more apparent. It is the failure in the process of reintegration that causes recidivism. Mentally ill inmates leaving the criminal system rely heavily on reintegration programs. When the reintegration process breaks down for either population, recidivism rates increase. Recidivism rates are highest with comorbid mentally ill and substance addiction. When used correctly in reintegration stages, mentally ill prisoners have a higher chance of reintegrating into their communities successfully.

 

2.      Substance abuse, deinstitutionalization, no support group, employment, part-time, full-time employment, peers, homeless, "frequent system utilizers," mentally ill, uneducated, lack of skills, and health issues are the obvious symptoms of this problem (Harding & Roman, 2017). Researchers help to develop answers. Sociologists focus on groups but narrow it down to the individual when necessary. Prison reintegration is an example of when zeroing down to the individual level provides an expanded understanding. When the mentally ill leave the institution, it must be completed in stages since change and self-care is difficult for the mentally challenged. Jails rarely provide medication, shelter phone numbers, counselor, or parole officer information. Davis et al. (2012) identify six factors that lead to recidivism: substance abuse, lack of employment, low family bonds, deviant friends, low motivation, and young age; where is a mental illness in this list?

 

3.      Remembering the 1980s when Reagan "emptied" the mental institutions and jails filled with crack dealers provided a good reference point for the beginning of the problem, but not exactly. The mentally ill became "frequent system utilizers" (Harding & Roman, 2017) after being pushed out of institutions that provided a structured routine, daily medicines, housing, nutrition, protection, sobriety, support, and an accepting community. Dlugacz and Droubi (2017) provided a correlational history of overlapping mass deinstitutionalization of mental institutions in the 1950s, rapidly increasing homelessness, and exploding incarceration rates fourfold for over three decades. In the 1950s, the United States had over half a million mentally ill patients. That number decreased to under 50,000 by mid 2,000. Under the ADA, mentally ill prisoners are entitled to reintegration programs tailored to meet their needs that the general prison population does not receive. However, there are other prisoner protections provided under the Constitution. For example, under the Eighth Amendment, prisoners are protected from cruel and unusual punishment, yet the Deshaney Principle of 1989 clarified that the Constitution only provided minimum standards while incarcerated and a lack of rights upon release (Dlugacz & Droubi, 2017).

 

4.      Statistics representing who suffers from this problem are indeed significant, but it is whom researchers have yet to identify that may be suffering under this umbrella of a cause that is disconcerting. With our political environment changing, whether the Eighth Amendment is recognized in prisons in the United States is questionable (Dlugacz & Droubi, 2017). Supermax prisons house prisoners placed into solitary confinement more consistently than other criminal institutions. Luigi et al. (2020) explain that purpose of solitary confinement is to place highly disruptive individuals into confined quarters for 22 plus hours a day for extended periods. Healthy-minded individuals will succumb to the brain damage this will cause, and the mentally ill will decline exponentially. Solitary confinement alone is an unusual and extreme punishment for a seriously mentally ill individual and will increase recidivism rates for the mentally ill population. In addition, solitary confinement will add to the mentally ill population (Luigi et al., 2020).

 

5.      Prevalence rates ebb and tide depending on various logistic factors. Two key co-occurring prevalence rates to study are mental illness and substance abuse at the time of arrest and release from the institution without medication, housing, supervision, and a reentry plan. National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI, 2020) reports that 21% of the U.S. adult population in 2020 experienced mental illness. When pressures to have social equity cannot be met, mentally ill individuals often self-medicate. Societal pressures for reintegrating mentally ill inmates lead to isolation from family members, turning to the wrong type of friends, poor self-agency, unemployment, ceasing medications, missed doctors' appointments, and therapy sessions, leading to additional health problems, homelessness, and recidivism. Wilson et al. (2012) point out that 54% of inmates with strictly mental severe issues are reincarcerated, 68% of inmates with serious mental and substance abuse are reincarcerated, 66% of inmates with substance abuse alone, and 60% of inmates with no issues listed. Wilson et al. (2012) can make a connection with those statistics for the importance of the Olmstead Act (Dlugacz & Droubi, 2017).

 

6.      Rather than provide quantitative data, Davis et al. (2012) provided qualitative demographic descriptions which include longitudinal changes. The individuals' demographics change as they move through the system, especially "frequent system utilizers" (Harding & Roman, 2017). Davis et al. (2012) use demographics to place offenders into categories who face obstacles and how they meet those challenges. There are six categories with two counterparts per category. For the paper, it is essential to remember that Davis et al. (2012) * did not include mental illness in their study. The six categories are (1) substance abuse: continue or desist; (2) employment: lack of employment, half-time, full-time; (3) family support: low family bonds; (4) type of friends: law-abiding friends, deviant friends; (5) personal motivation to change: internal motivation, low motivation, increased personal incentives; (6) age: young and healthy, maturing with wisdom, aging with health conditions that make it impossible to commit more crime. After reading the descriptions of these categories, it outlines what types of individuals circulate through our mental and criminal institutions, young risk-tasking individuals with low family connections and high substance users. Advocacy research requires solid statics for oppositional purposes to gain funding; however, research overwhelmingly proves that our younger generation and mentally ill population cycle through our institutions.

 

7.       

a.      What could be a short-term problem impacting individuals who reenter society is not having a plan in place before it occurs. Mentally ill individuals must function on a strict routine that includes taking medicine, sleeping, eating meals, and completing tasks on a schedule. The mentally ill are not equipped to be self-advocates. After being incarcerated for extensive periods, their self-agency skills decrease as their decision-making skills significantly decrease. Wallace and Wang (2020) explain that many mentally ill prisoners' general health declines post-release and ultimately causes recidivism due to poor reintegration policies, including releasing inmates without two weeks of medication or preparing them for post-release changes.

 

b.      Moore and Eikenberry (2020) find that more research in local communities' Iowa Department of Correction is necessary to establish the reintegration process for the mentally ill population. Overwhelmingly, technical recidivism is the reason prisoners recycle through the system. It can amount to leaving the county or state line without notifying proper authorities, submitting a dirty urine sample, or being late to work too many times. When a formerly mentally ill incarcerated individual suddenly is responsible for time management and impulse control, and no one is there to intervene, it becomes a battle between self-medicating or their medication, counselors, and parole officers. According to Moore and Eikenberry (2020), research on supervised releases increasingly supports reintegration success for mentally ill inmates.

 

c.       There is no short-term impact of the problem on society anymore. Unfortunately, when a problem becomes systemic, it loses the power a short-term problem carries. When patients receive treatment, a doctor does triage, and symptoms with longevity get attention last. Mentally ill patients began cycling through our court penal system in the 1950s, according to (Dlugacz & Droubi 2017). Substance abuse peaked in the 1980s when crack cocaine hit the streets. The United States is flooded with Fentanyl overdoses, and drug trafficking continues. Despite the connection between crime and substance abuse, Moore and Eikenberry (2020) discovered the importance of the release process into prisoner integration for inmates with substance abuse issues, including the mentally ill.

 

8.

a.

The long-term impact on the individual is becoming one of society's "frequent system utilizers" (Harding & Roman, 2017). Imagine being placed in solitary confinement daily for twenty-two hours, weeks at a time, for safety. Solitary confinement reduces disruptive and violent incidents or high-risk individuals and maintains a safe environment. Additionally, according to Luigi et al. (2020), administrative segregation is the strictest form of solitary confinement, and the mentally ill are 1.62 times more apt to be placed there or in solitary confinement than the general population. Regardless, prisoners' treatment in Supermax prisons brings new problems to society. Solitary confinement studies will ensue en masse due to Covid-19. Hopefully, this will provide an opportunity to shine a light on what prisoners face in Supermax prisons. Solitary confinement can destroy a healthy brain's functioning.

 

b.

According to Moore and Eikenberry (2020), the African American population is 4%, and Iowa has the fourth highest incarceration rate of African Americans in the United States. Interestingly, African Americans are not at an elevated risk of overall recidivism in Iowa but are for new recidivism. Moore and Eikenberry (2020) say that Native Americans and African Americans have a higher recidivism rate in Oregon, and Asians and Hispanics do in a county in Pennsylvania. They explain that the risk of reincarceration increases when one lives in an area where reincarceration is high. In other words, the problem remains a local problem. The individual maintains the same lifestyle, which leads to recidivism in local communities.

 

c.

Dlugacz and Droubi (2017) provide an exemplarily long-term problem society faces. In 1989, New York violated the ADA and Olmstead by placing 4,300 individuals with mental illnesses into adult foster care homes, making it impossible to interact with stable-minded peers. This adult foster care placement mirrors what mentally ill inmates face daily in the penal system. As Harding and Roman (2017) explain, "frequent systems utilizers" churn through taxpayers' dollars as a burden using up hospital beds, shelters, emergency rooms, psychiatrists, jails, prisons, public libraries, and park benches as they loiter, use illegal substances, sleep, fight, shelter, and commit a crime. The "frequent systems utilizers" also remind the system daily that it is inadequate.

 

9.

Davis et al. (2012) explain the importance of desistance in life course theory. For a prisoner to remain out of incarceration, there must be self-agency. How much self-agency is necessary? What are other factors at play? The problem in deciding whether to send mentally ill individuals back to the penal institution or place them into adult foster-care home is just the beginning. Although unfortunately, society has been at the opening gate for seventy-plus years now, it has been a systemic problem for far too long. Which is why society continues asking, "but why?"

 

 

 

From personal experience, I have several relatives that served time in state prisons for murder. A cousin did time for two murders; at seventeen, he served time in a juvenile detention center in Michigan for a random murder, and at twenty-one, he served time for murdering another stranger in Georgia. Later he was released on early parole in Georgia and was reincarcerated for raping his niece a few months after his release. He returned to Georgia lock-up for a few more months. Each time the system locked him up, he was sentenced to his original forty years without early parole. It is puzzling as to why he still is paroled. Each of his murders was unusually heinous. Personal experience is the reason I believe people need to care about "frequent system utilizers,” (Harding   Roman, 2017.) We do not know who they are, but we know they are out there.

 

References

 

Davis, C., Bahr, S. J., & Ward, C. (2012). The process of offender reintegration: Perception of what helps prisoners reenter society. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 13(4), 446-469. http://doi.org/10.1177/1748895812454748

Dlugacz, H. A., & Droubi, L. (2017). The reach and limitation of the ADA and its integration and mandate: Implications for the successful reentry of individuals with mental disabilities in a correctional population. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 35, 135-161. http://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2281

Harding, C. S., & Roman, C.G. (2017). Identifying discrete subgroups of chronically homeless frequent jail and mental health services utilizers. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 44(4), 511-530. http://doi.org/10.1177/009385481668038    

James, & Glaze, L. E. (2006). Mental health problems of prison and jail inmates (Revised 12/14/06.). U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

      

Luigi, M., Dellazizzo, L., Giguère, C. -È., Goulet, M. -H, Potvin, S., Dumais, A. (2022). Solitary confinement of inmates associated with relapse into any recidivism including violent crime: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 23(2), 444-456. http://doi.org/10.1177/15283802957983

Moore, J., & Eikenberry, J. (2021). Recidivism by conviction offense type and release status among prisoners released in Iowa. Crime & Delinquency, 67(3), 344-365. http://doi.org/10.1177/001128720944075

Wallace, D., & Wang, X. (2020). Does in-prison physical and mental health impact recidivism?, SSM-Population Health, 11, 1-16. http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ssmph

Wilson, A. B., Draine, J., Hadley, T., Metraux, S., & Evans, A. (2011). Examining the impact of mental illness and substance use on recidivism in county jail. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 34, 264-268. http://doi.org/10.j.ijlp.2011.07.004

Wolf, N. (2005). Community reintegration of prisoners with mental illness: A social investment perspective. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 28, 43-58. http://doi.org/10.10.1016/j.ijlp.2004.12.003

 

 

Comments