Not really. The person on the outside is free to marry anyone else.
The loved ones of people in prison always suffer because the inmate cannot be with them in a normal capacity. This is not the fault of society for taking away the inmate’s rights…it is the fault of the inmate for commiting the crime that put them there in the first place.
We do not live in a vaccuum. Our actions will affect those around us.
Isabelle, do you actually want prisons to drug the inmates to make them more docile and manageable? That’s what you seem to be saying we should do by giving them drugs to cut their sex drives. I don’t know of a safe way to do that. Do you? Do you want to pay for their additional medical care when their kidneys fail or they develop tumors from the side-effects of giving meds to millions of people who don’t otherwise need them?
QtM, MD
In all the defense about the absolute minimum rights that prisons receive, I haven’t seen anyone mention, what to me would appear to be an obvious recommendation for treating these people as humans… what of those there that have been incarcerated unjustly? I know that’s probably a small percentage and I wouldn’t even know how to go about looking for a specific cite, but regardless, that alone would temper my stance; staring at the possibility that some person had been in jail serving a twenty year sentence with only basic conditions allowed (as mentioned throughout this thread) and he truly was innocent of that he’d been charged with.
Next, I have no problem with anything that will help rehabilitate or prevent recidivism. That includes education (even at the college level, but hey, I feel that should be free to us as a country anyway, just like health care) and the right to form bonds outside via marriage, etc. (like common law or long-term relationships). I also think anything that retains their dignity and sense of some sort of connectedness with society is a good thing, because it promotes, IMHO, behaving in a manner conducive to the mores around them. Like attending the funerals of loved ones if permissible and not a flight risk and being allowed to observe whatever religious practices one holds to (through dietary concerns or having the access to chaplains, services, information and the like – and yes, that extends to ALL varieties).
Lastly, I also think that setting out to make prison as uncomfortable intentionally as possible is only detrimental to the system itself, unfair to anyone who shouldn’t honestly be there and degrading to the remainder who probably won’t necessarily view themselves as any more important than the community has deemed them to be. IE: Why should they perceive there self-image as worthy if we treat them like they are not at all? Certainly if they’d grown up like that, prison may be their first chance to experience some semblance of normalcy. Therefore, I think, at least, minimum options (for example, air conditioning, standard entertainment fare in the forms of libraries and cable) can only result in positive attitudes.
I don’t think anyone, as erislover says, ends up there because it’s a walk in the park and something to be desired. Also, no matter how damning and horrible a consequence some environment might be (see Alcatraz maybe), actual commitment of a crime hardly depends on viewing whether or not your circumstances will be more difficult, unpleasant or miserable. Another case of the idea that it’s supposed to be a deterrent and unfortunately, is not.
I just don’t begrudge anyone some compassion. Especially those who need it most. But again, that’s just MHO.
Instead of the term “Conjugal Visits”, many institutions are now calling them “Private Family Visits”
Conjugal Visits implies to the reader that the only purpose is for sex and nothing more.
This is simply not true.
More often than not, an inmates family will join him in a PFV (Private Family Visit) for a 72 hour period.
This takes place in a small house or trailer located on the prison grounds. These PFV units are just like a regular house with all the amenities. They also come in different sizes to accommodate large and small families.
Now before some of you begin gasping,and shaking your head in disbelief, allow me to explain:.
Visits and strong family support play a vital role to the successful reintegration of inmates from prison, back into the community (where you and I live)
Of course I don’t advocate this “privilege” for the “Charles Manson types” and for people on death row, let’s be reasonable.
I do however think it’s a good idea if it will help families stay together during an inmates incarceration.
** John Smith is married for 7 years, has two children aged 4 and 6.
John Smith is happily married and enjoying a rather successful lifestyle.
Something his wife doesn’t know - business is down, the economy is down, John Smith is very close to losing everything, his house, his business, everything he has worked for all his life.
John Smith is a pro-social individual who has no criminal record, and tries to help his neighbor when he can.
He is having lunch one day with his shady brother-in-law who lives a criminal lifestyle.
John Smith learns he can earn $50,000 very quickly by bringing a suitcase in from South America. (bad decision on John’s part isn’t it?)
John thinks this “one-time” deal will save his business and give his family the security he so much wants for them.
So John tries to bring the suitcase into the country, and gets busted at Pearson International Airport in Toronto.
Canada has an automatic sentence for drug smugglers, and John Smith receives the minimum sentence of 7 years in a federal penitentiary.
Bad move John, but what’s done is done, so now let’s deal with it.
Did John make a mistake?
Oh yeah.
Does he deserve to be punished? Of course!
Let’s take a look at his punishment:
Now you guys quiet down for a minute, I know you’re chomping at the bit to start typing :))
Does John deserve what he got?
I think he did, he knew what he was doing, took a risk and got caught.
He can apply for day parole after serving 14 months, and if all goes well, he can be on full parole after 28 months.
If John’s family joins him in a PFV every 6 months until he makes day parole, is this really that bad?
The PFV program costs nothing to run, it’s a great incentive that can be taken away if required, and it helps families stay together as a family.
Now, for you hard-liners, will it really make you feel better taking away his cable TV, and his PFV while inside? There really is a difference between justice and revenge.
Maybe a daily beating should be included with his sentence? Will this make you feel better about your selves?
There are many “John Smith’s” in the world, people who broke a law, made a mistake, and are now back to being a productive member of society, and living crime free.
Isabelle, you keep using the word “deserve”. What does that have to do with anything?
Let me ask you a simple question: What’s the point of prison?
Look, you are presenting two separate issues which don’t neccesarily have to go together.
(1) Should prisoners be allowed to get married?
Definitely, they should.
and
(2) Should married prisoners be allowed conjugal visits?
In certain instances, yes. But it depends upon the nature of the crime that the inmate commited. If its a crime involving violence or sex offenses, I’d say no.
However, if all they did was write bad checks I say let them have their nookie.
We can’t give them “Zero” rights. Prisoners still retain certain rights under our Constitution. Such as the right to be free from Cruel and Unusual Punishments, and the right to Due Process of Law (if they choose to file appeals). They are human beings and deserve to be treated with basic human dignity.
No, we aren’t. Especially if the inmate and their spouse are separated by a plexiglas partition and aren’t even allowed to hold hands. People should be allowed to declare their love in an official manner, even if they are currently paying a debt to society.
The Supreme Court has held that marriage is a “fundamental right”
ZABLOCKI v. REDHAIL, 434 U.S. 374 (1978).
This right has been held to extend to prisoners as well. TURNER v. SAFLEY, 482 U.S. 78 (1987) In Turner, the Court held that
Do you also realize that there are people who are in prison for only a few years, instead of for decades or for their entire life?
I don’t mean to come across THAT WAY I just feel strongly that if a prisoner wants a college education that they or their familes pay for it. Going to prison shouldn’t be a “benefit”
To remove all rights and privlidges and “punish” for their wrong doing.
What do I mean by “deserve?” Ok I opt to replace that word with “entitled” I do not think prisoners should be “entitled” to have sex in the slammer.
But neither should it ruin the rest of your life one you’re released.
Let’s take for example a kid who *was * imprisoned for having been caught with a joint in his pocket. (Though folks like him are a rarity.) We’ll call him “Mike.”
Mike serves his time and is released back into the community. Unfortunately, despite his yearning to be a productive member of society, no one will give him a job. He’s just another ex-con with a high-school education. The only job he can get is minumum-wage, dead-end work. He can’t support a family, and he had no possibility of living the much-vaunted middle class lifestyle.
Frustrated and angry at being denied a chance, Mike may turn back to crime, the only way he can make any money. A drug dealer makes quite a bit more than a dishwasher, after all, without the mindless drudgery. Mike has no incentive to stay “straight.”
But, if Mike had a college diploma, employers might be more inclined to give him a chance. After all, he’s shown an interest in bettering himself, and has shown he’s willing to work hard for it. He must be a smart guy to have gotten a degree under such conditions.
If nothing else, they may give him a position on the “ground floor”-- in the mail room, for example. (Other applicants for such a position might not have a degree. Mike stands out because he has one.) Mike now has the opprotunity for advancement that he needs, and hope for the future.
Even with a free college education, Mike didn’t get any advantages over a kid who works his way through school. No matter what, Mike will always be looked at as a criminal, and that will hold him back. The kid with a clean record will always be an employer’s first choice. All a degree does is make an ex-inmate slightly more respectable.
All we’re doing is allowing these ex-inmates to have a chance at a decent life. Is it “fair” that they’re getting for free what others have to work for? I don’t look at it that way. Life isn’t fair, nor will it ever be.
You are right LIFE IS NOT FAIR! You bring up some interesting points and I appreciate your thoughts. It gives me something to think about.
Sorry . . . Hit “Post” before I was finished.
Many inmates are indigent. They can’t even pay for their tolietries. Many of them either have poor families, or have been abandoned by their kin. (Many times, the families won’t even claim the inmate’s body when they die. Our prison has a “potter’s field” where unwanted inmates are buried in styrofoam coffins in umarked graves.)
Since many inmates can count on no help from those on the outside, the only income they have comes from jobs in the prison, earning twenty cents an hour. There’s utterly no way they could ever pay for a college education, and I sincerely doubt in their ability to get a scholarship.
Why not let them have a college education for free? Who’s it hurting? If anything, it benefits the community by potentially reducing recidivism, which far outways the nominal cost.
I agree that life is not fair. There is no fairy that will drop in and notice this fact and then grant all kinds of equity. We deal with what we’re given to the best of our abilities. I’m amazed at the number of people who don’t seem to grasp that (And with this I mean people I know in RL not a slam at anyone on the board)
I also have to ask my brother a little more about his classes he signed up for. One is welding, there are some life skills ones and he is hoping to take some English classes. I highly doubt the ‘college degree’ classes he could take (He was looking to take some kind of computer degree classes) are quite the quality or hold the esteem that the majority of non community colleges in the public sector do. The prisoners are not getting their degrees from Yale…
And like Lissa said, that record will follow you forever and make getting even the most menial jobs more difficult. The education gained in prison shows a potential employer that the applicant didn’t just bide his time lifting weights and watching TV but tried to make himself someone who could function in society upon release.