The surprising reason our correctional system doesn't work | Brandon W. Mathews | TEDxMileHigh
TLDRThe speaker advocates for a radical reform in the correctional system by proposing a 'divorce' between punishment and rehabilitation. They argue that the current system is ineffective due to the entanglement of these two goals. The speaker suggests creating two separate tracks: one for punishment of high-risk offenders and another for the rehabilitation of non-violent individuals, emphasizing the need for a system that focuses on reducing recidivism and making communities safer.
Takeaways
- 👍 The speaker supports divorce in the context of separating punishment from rehabilitation within the correctional system.
- 🏛 The speaker has worked in various parts of the criminal justice system, focusing on corrections and its impact on rehabilitation.
- 🔍 The speaker's research into the correctional system revealed that punishment practices are too intertwined with rehabilitation goals, hindering effectiveness.
- 🏢 The current system assigns inmates to prisons based on anticipated misbehavior rather than on their needs for rehabilitation and treatment.
- 🔑 The U.S. prison philosophy prioritizes punishment over rehabilitation, treating the latter as an afterthought.
- 🚪 The concept of a 'revolving door' in the justice system highlights the high recidivism rate and the failure of the current system to effectively rehabilitate offenders.
- 🛑 The speaker proposes a 'divorce' between punishment and rehabilitation, advocating for two separate tracks within the correctional system.
- 🚓 Track one would focus on punishment for high-risk, violent, and dangerous offenders, providing basic programs in a strict environment.
- 🛠 Track two would concentrate on rehabilitation for non-violent offenders, with treatment-based facilities and staff focused on behavior change and reintegration.
- 🌍 The speaker contrasts the U.S. correctional system with Norway's, which has a lower recidivism rate due to its focus on rehabilitation.
- 🌟 The change to a two-track system would require a paradigm shift, collective action, and a reevaluation of beliefs about the purpose of corrections.
Q & A
What is the speaker's stance on divorce in the context of the criminal justice system?
-The speaker is in favor of a 'divorce' within the correctional and prison system, suggesting a separation of punishment and rehabilitation practices.
What are the two main types of people who work in corrections according to the speaker?
-The two main types are those who want to enforce rules and laws and those who want to help with rehabilitation.
Why did the speaker feel frustrated with her work in corrections?
-The speaker felt frustrated because despite her efforts, she felt that the correctional system was not effectively improving or making a positive impact on behavior change.
What was the speaker's approach to understanding why the correctional system wasn't working?
-The speaker started researching from a systems perspective, studying the cultures, leadership styles, and social identities within corrections and how they view their roles and responsibilities.
What is the fundamental problem the speaker identifies with the current prison philosophy in the United States?
-The fundamental problem is that the practices of punishment are too interconnected with the goal of rehabilitation, making rehabilitation an afterthought rather than a priority.
What does the speaker propose as an alternative to the current correctional system?
-The speaker proposes a two-track correctional system, one for punishment and one for rehabilitation, to separate the two practices and address them more effectively.
What is the 'revolving door' of the justice system referring to?
-The 'revolving door' refers to the high recidivism rate, where a large percentage of offenders return to prison after being released.
What is the historical basis of the U.S. penal philosophy?
-The U.S. penal philosophy is rooted in the retributive ideals of the mid-1700s B.C., as seen in the Code of Hammurabi, which influenced later corrections practices.
How does the speaker describe the current state of rehabilitation within the correctional system?
-The speaker describes rehabilitation as being contaminated by the core purpose of punishment, and thus not truly separate or effective in the current system.
What is the speaker's view on the role of punishment in the correctional system?
-The speaker believes that punishment should be a separate track for high-risk, violent, and dangerous offenders, with access to basic programs in a strict environment.
What example does the speaker provide to illustrate a successful rehabilitation approach?
-The speaker cites Norway's correctional philosophy, which is focused on rehabilitation with the goal of reducing the risk of reoffending, resulting in a low recidivism rate.
What does the speaker suggest as the first step towards changing the correctional system?
-The first step is to question existing beliefs about corrections and initiate conversations within communities, including skeptics and leaders, to envision a different system.
Outlines
🔍 Divorce in the Correctional System
The speaker advocates for a conceptual 'divorce' within the correctional system, suggesting that the current approach to punishment and rehabilitation is ineffective and intertwined in a way that hinders true reform. They emphasize the need to separate these two aspects to create a system where punishment is focused on retribution for high-risk offenders, while rehabilitation is dedicated to helping non-violent offenders reintegrate into society. The speaker's background in corrections and their frustration with the lack of positive impact led them to research and propose this two-track system.
🏛 Punishment and Incapacitation for High-Risk Offenders
This paragraph delves into the history of the U.S. penal system, tracing its roots back to the Code of Hammurabi and the retributive ideals that shaped it. It discusses the shift from brutal public punishments to the establishment of penitentiaries with the aim of reform through solitary confinement and hard labor. The speaker criticizes the current system for its continued focus on punishment rather than rehabilitation, using the metaphor of a taco in a sandwich to illustrate the superficial inclusion of rehabilitation within a fundamentally punitive framework. They recount a personal experience that highlights the tension between security and rehabilitation within a prison treatment program.
🛠️ A Two-Track System for Rehabilitation and Punishment
The speaker outlines a proposed two-track system for corrections, one focused on punishment for high-risk, violent offenders, and the other on rehabilitation for non-violent offenders. They argue that the current system's criteria for program entry and parole are based on time served rather than on the delivery of appropriate treatment. The rehabilitation track would involve treatment-based facilities with staff dedicated to therapeutic approaches and behavior change. The speaker contrasts this approach with Norway's correctional philosophy, which prioritizes rehabilitation and has resulted in a significantly lower recidivism rate. They acknowledge the difficulty of implementing such a radical change but call for collective action and a reevaluation of societal expectations regarding punishment and rehabilitation.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Divorce
💡Correctional System
💡Rehabilitation
💡Punishment
💡Recidivism
💡Correctional Officer
💡Community Corrections
💡Systems Perspective
💡Retributive Ideal
💡Penitentiary
💡Treatment-Based Facilities
Highlights
The speaker is in favor of 'divorce' within the correctional and prison system to separate punishment from rehabilitation.
The correctional system currently focuses on punishment as the foundation, with rehabilitation as an afterthought.
Inmates are assigned to prisons based on anticipated misbehavior, not their specific rehabilitation needs.
The speaker proposes two separate tracks within the system: one for punishment and one for rehabilitation.
The U.S. correctional system's high recidivism rate is compared to the failure of investments or medical procedures.
The historical roots of the U.S. penal system trace back to the Code of Hammurabi and its retributive ideals.
The early 19th century shift to penitentiaries was based on the idea of solitary confinement for reform.
Rehabilitation in prisons was introduced in the 1870s, inspired by medical community's individualized treatment approach.
The speaker criticizes the current system for not truly separating rehabilitation from punishment.
An anecdote illustrates the tension between security and rehabilitation within a prison treatment program.
The rehabilitation track would focus on non-violent offenders and their successful reintegration into society.
Criteria for release in the rehabilitation track would be based on the completion of appropriate treatment, not time served.
Norway's correctional philosophy, focused on rehabilitation, achieves a significantly lower recidivism rate than the U.S.
The speaker calls for collective action and a radical change in beliefs about the purpose of corrections.
The envisioned correctional system aims to meet community expectations for both punishment and rehabilitation.
The speaker concludes by emphasizing the importance of a two-track system to slow the revolving door of the justice system and make communities safer.
Transcripts
Browse More Related Video
TEDxStLouis - Andre Norman - How to Fix the American Prison System
Swedish Prison vs United States Prison - How Do They Actually Compare?
America's Mass Incarceration Problem | INCARCERATING US | FREE FULL DOCUMENTARY
The German prison program that inspired Connecticut
Modern Marvels: The Frightening Evolution of Prisons (S6, E8) | Full Episode
Most Dangerous Places to Work: Life On the Psych Ward | Free Documentary
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)
Thanks for rating: