Introduction
In the era of mass incarceration, with many individuals being imprisoned and an unprecedented number of inmates preparing to return home, it is paramount to ensure successful reentry into society to prevent recidivism. However, many barriers inhibit reintegration, leading to former inmates being reincarcerated. For example, living conditions can substantially affect the ability of inmates to live in a non-prison environment. This paper aims to discuss the living conditions in prisons and prisoner reintegration as primary goals of improvement for the corrections system and the challenges with meeting these goals.
Goals of Improvement
Living conditions and reintegration of inmates into society are important improvement goals as they can benefit both incarcerated individuals and society as a whole. According to Ismail (2019), the conditions in penitentiaries are affected by the growth in the prison population and the lack of funding for the construction of new facilities and appropriate maintenance of the existing ones. Poor living conditions in prisons affect inmates physically and psychologically, contributing to difficulties with reentry into society after release. In order to improve the conditions in which prisoners live, the factors contributing to their deterioration should be addressed. For example, to decrease the prison population, more offenders committing non-violent crimes should be given alternative sentences that do not require incarceration. In particular, community services, fines, and restorative solutions should be considered (Ismail, 2019). This solution will contribute to improved conditions for other prisoners and the elimination of potential future issues with reintegration.
Reentry into society also presents a substantial challenge for prisoners conditioned to rely on the corrections institution and experience a significant decrease in personal autonomy while incarcerated. Visher and Travis (2011) note that the first months following the release are highly chaotic and characterized by the former inmates seeking stability and routine. Therefore, to improve the outcomes, programs that help ex-prisoners create a daily routine can be established. Furthermore, according to Simes (2018), neighborhood characteristics and community attachment can substantially impact reintegration. As institutional housing is often located in disadvantaged neighborhoods that can expose vulnerable individuals to undesirable settings, ensuring access to housing in neighborhoods with low crime rates is vital.
Challenges to Meeting the Goals
Both the improvement of living conditions in prisons and successful reintegration into society face a variety of challenges. The lack of funding for the corrections system presents a major barrier to the conditions in which prisoners live being improved. In addition, the mentality that poor living conditions are an extension of the punishment prevents meaningful changes. Meanwhile, former prisoners experience different personal, structural, and social challenges that inhibit reentry. Returning prisoners are often disconnected from their friends and families and have no social support structure, leading to them turning back to crime (Petersilia, 2004). Moreover, a lack of education and appropriate work experience can prevent individuals with a criminal record from securing employment and becoming independent and contributing members of society (Petersilia, 2004). Overall, the number of urgent duties and responsibilities returning inmates need to handle following release prevent effective reintegration as it becomes overwhelming without appropriate support.
Conclusion
In summary, the contemporary corrections system prevents successful reintegration and propagates recidivism. Thus, the enhancement of living conditions and reentry into society should become the primary areas of advancement. Although there are numerous challenges to these improvement goals, they can be achieved through various measures, including alternative sentences and programs that help returning inmates establish an efficient daily routine and form attachment to their community.
References
Ismail, N. (2019). Rolling back the prison estate: The pervasive impact of macroeconomic austerity on prisoner health in England. Journal of Public Health, 42(3), 625–632. Web.
Petersilia, J. (2004). What works in prisoner reentry? Reviewing and questioning the evidence. Federal Probation, 68(2), 4–8.
Simes, J. T. (2018). Place after prison: Neighborhood attainment and attachment during reentry. Journal of Urban Affairs, 41(4), 443–463. Web.
Visher, C. A., & Travis, J. (2011). Life on the outside: Returning home after incarceration. The Prison Journal, 91(3), 102–119. Web.