Prisoners should learn to read or lose parole rights

[Gyrate]

...or so says Jeffrey Archer:

Jeffrey Archer's ability to stir controversy was undiminished last night after he suggested that illiterate prisoners should be denied early release.

[...]

Archer, 63, maintains that too many prisoners are still illiterate when they leave jail partly because there is a financial disincentive to learning to read.

While they can get paid £12 a week working as a gardener or potato peeler, those taking up education receive just £4 or £5. Many are unprepared to forego their tobacco or phone cards, so choose the better-paid option.

"I would offer two suggestions," says Archer. "Pay those taking up full-time education the same wage as any other prison job; and introduce a 12-week reading and writing course for all illiterate prisoners, which would include a test at the end of the course that the prisoner would have to pass before they could be considered for any other job or, even more draconian, early release."

He adds: "This could result in thousands of prisoners returning to society with their minds, rather than just their muscles, expanded as well as the burden and stigma of total illiteracy lifted from them."

Now, while normally I take Jeffrey Archer's views with a Gibraltar-sized grain of salt, this is a thought-provoking idea. Certainly there are social benefits to encouraging illiterate convicts to learn to read in that it would give them an invaluable job skill when they are released and access to a world of information and options they hadn't previously had. And while the legality of denying prisoners early release on this basis is dubious, it would certainly provide a powerful incentive.

So here's the topic for debate: should the penal system require a certain level of literacy as a condition of parole? If not, what are the alternatives?

(If you can't access the Telegraph site, try the Mirror instead.)

[Muldoon's Squishiness]

Considering that Jeffrey Archer is a convicted felon and was found guilty of perjury no less, he has about as much credibility with me as Nixon did, which is to say less then none.

Denying a prisoner their parole because they can't read is insane.

[Gyrate]

Or maybe he's just trying to expand his target audience. The more readers without much in the way of discriminating taste there are, the more books he sells.

[astro]

I had no idea that illiteracy was such a problem among the lower socio-economic classes in England. I thought literacy was sort of well.. your thing, even among relatively poor people.

[Gyrate]

Illiteracy is a problem among the lower socio-economic classes everywhere, alas.

[Lumpy]

In theory, parole is letting a convict out of prison while his sentence is still running, on the grounds that he or she is supposedly rehabilitated enough that they can finish their term on the outside, with supervision. That is why parolees have restricted rights; they're still convicts, they're just finishing their sentence under very loose supervision.

If someone reads at the second grade level, and had been making their living as a career criminal, I would expect literacy to be a prerequisite of parole. Otherwise you're simply dumping them back onto the street. I could see an exception for people with genuine learning disabilities (dyslexia, etc.), but if someone isn't willing to learn to read, I wouldn't bet ten cents on their willingness to go straight and stay out of trouble.

[El Zagna]

Everyone here seems to assume that anybody - except perhaps those with dyslexia - can learn to read if they just try a little harder. There are many, many people out there who are functionally illiterate and who have agonized over trying to read.

When my son finished the fourth grade last year he was reading at about a first grade level, and this is after he was held back a year. Don't tell me he just wasn't trying hard enough when he would come home on the report card days and cry his cry his eyes out because he "just wasn't getting it."

Dyslexia wasn't even recognized as a phenomenon until relatively recently, and it's a safe bet that there are many other brain disorders that are yet unrecognized.

Connecting parole with learning to read is a very bad idea.

[Stonebow]

I have to agree with pretty much everything Lumpy said. I put it on par with providing some sort of vocational training- lack of legitimate skills are a good means of ensuring a return to the 'underground economy'.

Literacy is the basic means by which social mobility is possible...I don't think that it's an extra punishment to link parole to some basic literacy skills.

Of course, I would also have to insist on there being learning professionals on hand that have experience/training in dealing with adult education/learning disabilities, or else you are setting the inmates up for failure.

[Debaser]

I wonder if there is a connection between literacy of parolees and recividism?

Seems like a good idea to me, especially if there is a correlation between the two. Any metric that will help determine how likely the criminal is to break the law again can and should be used to make decisions on parole.

Not giving them parole isn't a punishment. It's simply making them serve the time they were sentanced to.

[Jennyrosity]

The first part of his suggestion - to pay those in education the same wage as those in any other job - is a good one though. But no-one should be denyed parole because they're illiterate.

[curly chick]

Originally posted by Debaser
Not giving them parole isn't a punishment. It's simply making them serve the time they were sentanced to.

That is the most sensible thing I have read today.

If recidivism can be related to illiteracy, then refusing parole to illiterate prisoners who refuse to go to class to learn how to read seems like a remarkably sensible idea.

Jeffrey Archer thought of that? I am more than stunned.
Get him out to Iraq, pdq.

[BrotherCadfael]

If you object to insisting that an inmate learn to read before being considered for parole, make learning to read a plus factor to be considered when the inmate is up for parole.

[El Zagna]

Still, nobody is addressing those poor slobs that are incapable of learning to read. There are a lot of folks out there who just can't do it for reasons we just don't understand at this point in time. For them you are setting an impossible goal.

[Lissa]

Parole boards are slowly being phased out in some states. Many convictions now come with "flat time."

My husband, who works in corrections, says that this is a problem in the institutions. It used to be that inmates who had parole possibilities would behave themselves, and join programs such as anger management, trying to make themselves as attractive as possible for the parole board. With "flat time" the inmate can pretty much behave as he wishes without fearing his release date will be pushed back. There's no incentive to join programs or get an education when they're going to be released on a certain date, anyway.

[Futile Gesture]

I don't think that anyone would disagree that education is not a very good thing and the more you get inside the better you'll be off outside. So I'm agreement with Lord* Archer thus far. But denying parole on it? I don't think so.


Not for much longer. Also note I use the term dripping with sarcasm.

[Wesley Clark]

Even if they become literate and educated you have to take into account that a parolee will probably have trouble finding a job. There was someone on SD a month or so ago who was 31 who almost got fired because he was convicted of a non-violent property crime at 19. Somoene convicted of a violent crime would have it 2x as bad.

I've read about the recidivism rate from various books (cant remember the titles offhand) and the best way to ensure a straight life on the outside is vocational training in prison. SSRIs are good too (one said that there was close to an 0.8 correlation between low serotonin levels and recidivism), and so is marriage. However, assuming a prisoner learns to read or obtains vocational training it will still be hard for him to find & keep a job. many places will not hire an ex-felon. So we are in our own way encouraging ex-felons to return to crime by trying to deny them the ability to find a living wage.

[TVAA]

Originally posted by Wesley Clark
SSRIs are good too (one said that there was close to an 0.8 correlation between low serotonin levels and recidivism)

Objection! Calls for speculation as to causation!

[Captain Amazing]

Originally posted by Muldoon's Squishiness
Considering that Jeffrey Archer is a convicted felon and was found guilty of perjury no less

Yes, but he can read.

It's actually not a bad idea, though. In this day and age, literacy has become pretty much neccesary, and if some one can't read when he goes into prison, it's probably better for both him and society if he learns before he gets out.

[j.c.]

How does it work across the pond?

Do they not have something like a parole board that grants parole on a case-by-case basis using factors such as literacy, family support, etc. in the parole review?

Anyway, I don't think parole is a right in the US, I think it's something that may be granted to certain individuals.

[Qadgop the Mercotan]

As a physician in a max-security prison, I must say that some of the inmates are so damaged (neurologically and psychologically) that I doubt they'll ever be able to learn to read, no matter how earnest their desire or how capable the teachers. I'm not talking dyslexia, I'm talking psychomotor retardation and lack of neuronal development in the first place from utterly barren home environments during the early years.

I'd also want to see statistics that show giving literacy to the non-literate prisoner reduces recidivism. Thrown another arbitrary hurdle (in the form of a new rehab criteria) at our struggling prison system and you will drive costs up, frustrate staff and inmates, and add to the bureaucracy. So before we do this, we'd better make damn sure it really makes a difference. I've seen too many "great ideas" implemented by the politicians which did nothing but cost money and frustrate staff without serving to improve the inmates' chances.

It's all pretty moot in the US anyway. With "Truth in sentencing" laws, they serve the time they're given at the time of sentencing. No parole, no reductions for "good time", no compassionate release.

QtM, treating some real wretched refuse who can't even recognize what it is they yearn for.

[Gyrate]

Thanks for the input, QtM. Despite Mr. Archer's recent holiday at Her Majesty's Pleasure (albeit in minimum security), I think he may fancy himself an expert on the penal system based on a very short and atypical incarceration experience.

[casdave]

In the UK parole only operates on those convicted of crimes attracting sentence awards of 4 years or more.

Parole is a long and tedious process, which involves collating reports from most every area of a jail, from external probation officers, it could involve local priests certainly any family, possibly the local police and these are all presented to a parole board who make their recommendations.

http://www.paroleboard.gov.uk/role.htm

Under that time, and above 18 months prisoners may apply for HDC - or Home Detention Curfew, which used to be for a maximum of 6 weeks before normal release, but this period has been extended recently and I'm not too sure what it is, methinks 13 weeks but I cannot remember where that came from, probably one of the regular sentencing updates.

A convicted person can serve more time when sentenced to 3 years 11 months than a person sentenced to 4 years if the latter get parole. I have seen this used by judges on property burglars quite often, annoys the hell out of the prisoner.

Under 4 years and a prisoner is released after half their term is up, the remainder is on licence.

Being on licence means that conditions can be placed upon the former prisoner until the licence period expires, typical conditions on a licence could be exclusion from certain districts, not being allowed to associate with certain individuals, residency in certain places(especially sex offenders).

If a former prisoner breaches their licence they may then be returned to priosn without further recourse to trial and may then have to complete their full judicial award in prison.

Rules have now been changed and now, even if the original award is completed, a further period of licence conditions may be applied, however returning such persons to prison then requires further legal action.

One licence condition I have seen being employed more often of late is a requirement to attend college for basic education, or attend job seekers courses run by our unemployment department.

One fairly new policy is just starting to be seen in in prisons which is the 'stikes' rule. This can be for as few as two serious offences of the same nature as an adult, usually for crimes of violence or sexualy related offences.

Upon the final triggering offence the criminal may be sentenced to a life licence, the criminal may serve the usual award for thier offence, but on release they have licence terms imposed without any time limit and any breach can result in a very lengthy return, without recourse to the courts.The prisoner may serve as many repeat terms of imprisonment as their length of life allows.

We are just starting to see a first few of these come through, it takes maybe eight to ten years to accumulate enough qualifying offences and previous jail terms before these individuals get around to their last 'strike'.

It is abosolutely true about the abysmal education standards of prisoners in the UK, howeve it seems to me that folk are putting the cart before the horse.
It is not poor education that is a cause of crime, rather the other way around, crime causes poor education.

Very many UK criminals cease attending school early on, most will not have attended class at all since age 12(whatever US grade that would be).
Even if they attended after that age it would be only for short periods and certainly not to learn anything.

I find it kind of ironic that the only thing that most of them are capable of reading and understanding are the UK tabliod press, whose bias, ranting, and distorted low brow reporting are the mainstays of the British blue collar workers knowledge of world events.
( We don't care who rules Britain, just as long as they have big tits - kind of newspapers)

Education in UK prisons has to cover a very wide range of abilities and difficulties, in a prison with perhaps 1000 inmates, there will be so many differing requirements, that the current education program cannot address them.
From minor mental illnesses, personality disorders, dyslexia, through to virtually every level of intellectual ability, the number of staff needed to address even the majority of education issues would be huge.
The education staff are not particularly specialist at dealing with many of the problems either, such staff are fairly few across the UK as a whole, and so expensive.

Although Archer's words, that education should be a higher priority, these are very nice but extremely difficult and expensive to implement, and when our voting public who, quite frankly, wants to see the majority of criminals flogged, killed, beaten up and generally abused, I just do not see how any politician is likely ever to gain approval for spending yet more money on our least worthy individuals, especially as there has not been any absolute evidence that education would actually reduce crime.

Anyway take a look here, but remember this is the corporate view and not necessarily the view of those of us who have to work face to face with offenders.

http://www.hmprisonservice.gov.uk/li....asp?Page=1038

http://www.dfes.gov.uk/offenderlearn...it_p.cfm?ID=13

The reason for the cynicism is simply that the prison service seems to be more interested in quantities of qualifications rather than quality, to such an extent that courses with a commitment of 26 weeks are being replaced by those with a committment of 13 weeks, or in extreme cases, just one week.

The replacement courses are also run on a basis that an instructor need actually not know anything about the subject matter, as long as they are able to follow the procedure of assessment as laid down, these are known as NVQ's.

[legion]

Hmmm...literacy = parole?

I can see this will end up boosting the criminals productivity.

Imagine the time that criminals will save simply by NOT robbing premises with "Beware of the Dog" or "No Cash on Premises" signs.